title: Bush v. Gore

text: The Court ruled 5–4 that no constitutionally valid recount could be completed by a December 12 "safe harbor" deadline. The Court asserted that "the Supreme Court of Florida has said that the legislature intended the State's electors to 'participat[e] fully in the federal electoral process,' as provided in ." The Court therefore effectively ended the proposed recount, because "the Florida Legislature intended to obtain the safe-harbor benefits of 3 U.S.C. §5." Souter said bluntly, "The 3 U.S.C. §5 issue is not serious." Breyer's dissent stated, "By halting the manual recount, and thus ensuring that uncounted legal votes will not be counted under any standard, this Court crafts a remedy out of proportion to the asserted harm. And that remedy harms the very fairness interests the Court is attempting to protect."


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Four justices (Stevens, Ginsburg, Souter and Breyer) had dissented from the Court's earlier (December 9) decision, by the same five-justice majority, to grant Bush's emergency request to stop the recount and grant certiorari. In their dissents from the Court's December 12 "per curiam" opinion, Breyer and Souter acknowledged that the counting up until December 9 had not conformed with equal protection requirements. However, Souter and Breyer favored remanding the case to the Florida Supreme Court for the purpose of crafting specific guidelines for how to count disputed ballots, in contrast to the majority's decision to halt the recount altogether. The actual counting had ended with the December 9 ruling, issued three days before any deadline.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: The dissenting opinions strongly criticized the five-justice majority for involving the Court in state-level affairs. Justice Stevens's dissent (joined by Justices Breyer and Ginsburg) concluded as follows:


title: Bush v. Gore

text: The "per curiam" opinion did not technically dismiss the case and instead "remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion." Gore's attorneys therefore understood that they could fight on and could petition the Florida Supreme Court to repudiate the notion that December 12 was final under Florida law.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Despite this, Gore dropped the case – and conceded the 2000 United States presidential election to George W. Bush shortly afterward – reportedly because he was not optimistic about how the Florida justices would react to further arguments and, as one of his advisers put it, "the best Gore could hope for was a slate of disputed electors." In addition, Gore campaign chairman Bill Daley argued that fighting on was futile because even if the Florida Supreme Court defied the U.S. Supreme Court and ordered a new recount, "the GOP would take them straight back to Washington, where the [U.S.] Supreme Court would repeat: 'You ain't going to count, okay? So quit bothering us.'"


title: Bush v. Gore

text: On remand, the Florida Supreme Court issued an opinion on December 22 that did not dispute whether December 12 was the deadline for recounts under state law, although this was disputed in a concurring opinion by Florida Supreme Court Justice Leander Shaw who nevertheless expressed deference to the U.S. Supreme Court's view on this issue and who also argued that, in any case, the Florida Supreme Court would (in his opinion) be unable to craft a remedy which would satisfy all of the U.S. Supreme Court's equal protection, due process, and other concerns.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Chief Justice Rehnquist's concurring opinion, joined by Justices Scalia and Thomas, began by emphasizing that this was an unusual case in which the Constitution requires federal courts to assess whether a state supreme court has properly interpreted the will of the state legislature. Usually, federal courts do not make that type of assessment, and indeed the "per curiam" opinion in this case did not do so. After addressing this aspect of the case, Rehnquist examined and agreed with arguments that had been made by the dissenting justices of the Florida Supreme Court.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Rehnquist also mentioned that he, along with Justices Scalia and Thomas, joined the Supreme Court's "per curiam" opinion and agreed with the legal analysis that was presented there.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: The ruling also states "the state legislature's power to select the manner for appointing electors is plenary; it may, if it so chooses, select the electors itself, which indeed was the manner used by state legislatures in several States for many years after the framing of our Constitution. ... The State, of course, after granting the franchise in the special context of Article II, can take back the power to appoint electors."


title: Bush v. Gore

text: "Bush v. Gore" prompted many strong reactions from scholars, pundits and others regarding the Court's decision, with a majority of publications in law reviews being critical. An analysis in "The Georgetown Law Journal" found that 78 scholarly articles were published about the case between 2001 and 2004, with 35 criticizing the decision and 11 defending it.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: The most closely decided aspect of the case was the key question of what remedy the Court should order, in view of an Equal Protection Clause violation. Gore had argued for a new recount that would pass constitutional muster, but the Court instead chose to end the election. Citing two Florida Supreme Court opinions, "Gore v. Harris" (December 8, seemingly in error) and "Palm Beach County Canvassing Board v. Harris" (November 21, footnote 55), the U.S. Supreme Court asserted that "the Florida Supreme Court has said that the Florida Legislature intended to obtain the safe-harbor benefits of 3 U.S.C. § 5" and that "any recount seeking to meet the December 12 date will be unconstitutional." This assertion has proven very controversial.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Finding that reasoning not to be persuasive, Michael W. McConnell writes that the two Florida court opinions cited by the Supreme Court supply no authoritative pronouncement of an absolute deadline. As better support for December 12 being the deadline under state law, McConnell points to two footnotes in the Florida Supreme Court's December 11 response on remand in "Palm Beach County Canvassing Board v. Harris (Harris I)", which he says must not have come to the justices' attention. Footnotes 17 and 22 characterized the safe harbor date of December 12 as an "outside deadline." Therefore, he writes, although these passages may not justify the U.S Supreme Court's decision, since the Court did not rely on them, "the Court may have reached the right result for the wrong reason." These footnotes state:


title: Bush v. Gore

text: According to Nelson Lund, former law clerk to Justice O'Connor and associate counsel to George H. W. Bush, a dissenter might argue that the Florida Supreme Court on remand in "Harris I" was discussing the "protest provisions of the Florida Election Code, whereas the issues in "Bush v. Gore" arose under the contest provisions." In retort to himself, Lund writes that the Florida court's decision in the contest case did not mention any alternative possible deadlines. Peter Berkowitz writes, "Perhaps it would have been more generous for the Court to have asked the Florida court on remand whether 'outside deadline' referred to contest-period as well as protest-period recounts." Abner Greene points to evidence that "the Florida Supreme Court thought all manual recounts – whether protest or contest – must be completed no later than December 12." Nevertheless, Greene concludes "lack of clarity about the Florida Supreme Court's views on the safe-harbor provision should have resulted in a remand to that court for clarification," in addition to the remand of December 4. The Court in "Bush v. Gore" did remand the case instead of dismissing it, but the remand did not include another request for clarification. Louise Weinberg argues that even giving the U.S. Supreme Court the benefit of the doubt that it acted appropriately in intervening in Florida state law, its actions should be deemed unconstitutional because its intervention was not coupled with any kind of remedy aimed at determining the actual outcome of the election.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Arguably, the Florida Supreme Court, after having stated on December 11 that December 12 was an "outside deadline", could have clarified its views on the safe-harbor provision or reinterpreted Florida law to state that December 12 was not a final deadline under Florida law, which the United States Supreme Court did not forbid the Florida Supreme Court from doing. Lund states that, as a practical matter, the Florida Supreme Court was unlikely to have actually been capable of conducting and completing a new constitutionally valid recount by the December 18, 2000 deadline for the meeting of the Electoral College.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Michael Abramowicz and Maxwell Stearns further argue that if the Florida Supreme Court had clarified or reinterpreted Florida state law on remand, then the United States Supreme Court might have struck down the Florida Supreme Court's action as being a violation of Article II of the United States Constitution. Abramowicz and Stearns point out that while Justices Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O'Connor did not join Chief Justice William Rehnquist's Article II concurrence, they did not explicitly oppose this concurrence either and thus kept the door open to nullifying a future ruling of the Florida Supreme Court on Article II grounds. Abramowicz and Stearns also argue that if the Bush v. Gore "per curiam" opinion genuinely allowed the Florida Supreme Court to clarify or reinterpret Florida state law and to thus order a new Florida manual recount, then Justices David Souter and Stephen Breyer likely would have joined the Bush v. Gore "per curiam" opinion–which they had not done. Laurence Tribe has a similar view on this issue, arguing that "[e]ven assuming the leeway [in regard to the remedy] the Court theoretically left open was real, the window it had failed to slam shut was hardly the sort of opening through which anyone would dare to crawl."


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Some critics of the decision argue that the majority seemed to seek refuge from their own logic in the following sentence in the majority opinion: "Our consideration is limited to the present circumstances, for the problem of equal protection in election processes generally presents many complexities." The Court's defenders argued that this was a reasonable precaution against the possibility that the decision might be read over-broadly, arguing that in the short time available it would not be appropriate to attempt to craft language spelling out in greater detail how to apply the holding to other cases. Critics, however, interpreted the sentence as stating that the case did not set precedent in any way and could not be used to justify any future court decision, and some suggested that this was evidence the majority realized its holding was untenable. Regardless of whether the majority intended the decision to be precedential, it has been cited by several federal courts in election cases, as well as by a lawyer for a Republican congressional candidate during legal arguments coincident with the 2020 United States Presidential Election.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: According to legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, ""Bush v. Gore" broke David Souter's heart. "The day the music died", he called it. It was so political, so "transparently" political, that it scarred Souter's belief in the Supreme Court as an institution." (emphasis in original)


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Various authors have claimed that conservative Republican-appointed justices ruled against Gore in this case for partisan reasons. Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz writes:


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Chapman University School of Law professor Ronald Rotunda responded that Democratic-appointed justices of the Florida Supreme Court also ruled against Gore:


title: Bush v. Gore

text: There has also been analysis of whether several justices had a conflict of interest that should have forced them to recuse themselves from the decision. On several occasions, Rehnquist had expressed interest in retiring under a Republican administration; one study found that press reports "are equivocal on whether facts existed that would have created a conflict of interest" for Rehnquist. At an election night party, O'Connor became upset when the media initially announced that Gore had won Florida, her husband explaining that they would have to wait another four years before retiring to Arizona. Both justices remained on the Court beyond President Bush's first term, until Rehnquist's death in 2005 and O'Connor's retirement in 2006. According to Steven Foster of the Manchester Grammar School:


title: Bush v. Gore

text: The day after Thanksgiving, when the conservative justices agreed to hear Bush's appeal in the case of "Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board" (excluding Bush's equal protection claim), the opposing justices were convinced that the majority intended to reverse the Florida Supreme Court and shut down the recount. They began drafting a dissent before this case was argued before them, a dissent that was temporarily shelved upon the Court's unanimous remand to the Florida court.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: The liberal law clerks noted Justice Scalia later had begun campaigning for the stay of the Florida court's December 8 recount order before the Court had received Gore's response to Bush's request and was so incensed at Stevens's dissent in the matter of the stay and grant of certiorari, that he requested the release of opinions be delayed so that he could amend his opinion to include a response to Stevens. Kennedy is also reported to have sent out a memo which accused the dissenters of "trashing the court". Later, court personnel, as well as Ron Klain, speculated that there was an unspoken understanding that the judges on the winning side would not retire until after the next election, as a way of preserving some sense of fairness. Indeed, no Supreme Court justices retired during President Bush's first term.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: It has been argued that none of the justices ended up voting in a way that was consistent with their prior legal jurisprudence, though this conclusion has been challenged by George Mason University law professor Nelson Lund (who argues that, unlike in suspect classification cases, the United States Supreme Court has never actually required a showing of intentional discrimination in fundamental rights cases, such as "Bush v. Gore" itself). The five conservative justices decided to involve the federal judiciary in a matter that could have been left to the states, while also expanding the previous US Supreme Court interpretations of the Equal Protection Clause. Meanwhile, the liberal justices all supported leaving the matter in the hands of a state and also sometimes advocated in favor of a narrower reading of existing Equal Protection Clause SCOTUS precedents. This increased the perceptions that the judges used their desired results to drive their reasoning, instead of using legal reasoning to arrive at a result. David Cole of Georgetown Law argued that, as a way of trying to rehabilitate the court's image after "Bush v. Gore", the court became more likely to reach a liberal decision in the four years after "Bush v. Gore" than they had been before the case, and that the conservative justices were more likely to join the liberals rather than the other way around.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: In 2001, the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago, sponsored by a consortium of major United States news organizations, conducted the Florida Ballot Project, a comprehensive review of 175,010 ballots that vote-counting machines had rejected from the entire state, not just the disputed counties that were recounted. The project's goal was to determine the reliability and accuracy of the systems used in the voting process, including how different systems correlated with voter mistakes. The study was conducted over a period of 10 months. Based on the review, the media group concluded that if the disputes over the validity of all the ballots in question had been consistently resolved and any uniform standard applied, the electoral result would have been reversed and Gore would have won by 60 to 171 votes. On the other hand, under scenarios involving review of limited sets of ballots uncounted by machines, Bush would have kept his lead. In one such scenario — Al Gore's request for recounts in four predominantly Democratic counties — Bush would have won by 225 votes. In another scenario (if the remaining 64 Florida counties had carried out the hand recount of disputed ballots ordered by the Florida Supreme Court on December 8, applying the various standards that county election officials said they would have used), Bush would have emerged the victor by 493 votes.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: The scenarios involving limited sets of ballots included the completed uncertified recount by Palm Beach County, which nevertheless had excluded a set-aside cache of dimpled ballots with clear indications of intent, an uncounted net gain of 682 votes for Gore. In contrast, the scenarios involving all uncounted ballots statewide considered all votes from Palm Beach County, subjected to various standards of inclusion. "The Washington Post" qualified the tallies conducted by the NORC consortium with the statement: "But no study of this type can accurately recreate Election Day 2000 or predict what might have emerged from individual battles over more than 6 million votes in Florida's 67 counties."


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Further analysis revealed that black-majority precincts had three times as many rejected ballots as white precincts. "For minorities, the ballot survey found, a recount would not have redressed the inequities because most ballots were beyond retrieving. But a recount could have restored the votes of thousands of older voters whose dimpled and double-voted ballots were indecipherable to machines but would have been clear in a ballot-by-ballot review."


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Several subsequent articles have characterized the decision as damaging the reputation of the court, increasing the view of judges as partisan, and decreasing Americans' trust in the integrity of elections, an outcome predicted by Justice Stevens in his dissent. Part of the reason recounts could not be completed was the various stoppages ordered by the various branches and levels of the judiciary, most notably the Supreme Court. Opponents argued that it was improper for the Court (by the same five justices who joined the "per curiam" opinion) to grant a stay that preliminarily stopped the recounts based on Bush's likelihood of success on the merits and possible irreparable injury to Bush. Although stay orders normally do not include justification, Scalia concurred to express some brief reasoning to justify it, saying that one potential irreparable harm was that an invalid recount might undermine the legitimacy of Bush's election (presumably if, for example, it were to find that Gore should have won). Supporters of the stay, such as Charles Fried, contend that the validity of the stay was vindicated by the ultimate decision on the merits and that the only thing that the stay prevented was a recount "being done in an unconstitutional way."


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Some critics argued that the Court's decision was a perversion of the Equal Protection Clause and contrary to the political question doctrine. Scott Lemieux of University of Washington points out that if recounting votes without a uniform statewide standard were truly a violation of the Equal Protection Clause, this should have meant that the initial count, which also lacked a uniform standard, was itself unconstitutional. On the other hand, Geoffrey R. Stone has expressed sympathy with the Court's equal protection reasoning, even though Stone was dismayed by what he saw as the sudden and suspect conversion of Justices Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas to that equal protection principle. According to Stone:


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Justice Stevens' criticism of the Court in his dissent for questioning the impartiality of Florida's judiciary was itself criticized by Lund, a former law clerk for Justice O'Connor. Professor Charles Zelden faults the "per curiam" opinion in the case for, among other things, not declaring that the nation's electoral system required significant reform, and for not condemning administration of elections by part-time boards of elections dominated by partisan and unprofessional officials. Zelden concludes that the Court's failure to spotlight this critical flaw in American electoral democracy made a replay of "Bush v. Gore" more likely, not less likely, either in Florida or elsewhere. In 2013, retired Justice O'Connor, who had voted with the majority, said that the case "gave the court a less-than-perfect reputation". She added, "Maybe the court should have said, 'We're not going to take it, goodbye.' ... And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day."


title: Bush v. Gore

text: A subsequent article in "Vanity Fair" quotes several of the court's clerks at the time who were critical of the decision. They note that, despite the per curiam decision's declaration that the case was taken "reluctantly", Justice Kennedy had been rather enthusiastic about taking the case all along. They felt at the time, as had many legal scholars, that the case was unlikely to go to the Supreme Court at all. In fact some of the justices were so certain that the case would never come before them that they had already left for vacations.


title: Bush v. Gore

text: Editorials in the country's leading newspapers were overwhelmingly critical of the decision. A review by "The Georgetown Law Journal" found that the nation's top newspapers, by circulation, had published 18 editorials criticizing the decision, compared with just 6 praising it. They similarly published 26 op-eds criticizing the decision, compared to just 8 defending the decision. Polls showed a range of reactions, with 37–65% of respondents believing that personal politics influenced the decision of the justices, depending on the poll. A Princeton Survey poll recorded 46% of respondents saying that the decision made them more likely to suspect the partisan bias of the judges in general. An NBC News/"Wall Street Journal" poll showed that 53% of respondents believed that the decision to stop the recount was based mostly on politics. A 2010 article in "Slate" listed the case as the first in a series of events that eroded American trust in the results of elections, noting that the number of lawsuits brought over election issues has more than doubled since "Bush v. Gore".


title: Sonny Landham

text: William M. "Sonny" Landham III (February 11, 1941 – August 17, 2017) was an American actor and stunt performer. He portrayed Billy Bear in "48 Hrs." and tracker Billy Sole in "Predator".


title: Sonny Landham

text: Landham was born February 11, 1941, in Canton, Georgia, and raised in Rome, Georgia. He identified as being of half Cherokee and one-eighth Seminole descent, and partly of German, English and Irish descent. He also stated he had Jewish heritage. Landham had at least one sibling, a sister, Dawn.


title: Sonny Landham

text: He attended Saint Mary's Catholic School and Darlington School before playing football for a year at the University of Georgia. Subsequently, he graduated from Oglethorpe University. After college, he did a stint in the army, worked in an oil field, as an ordained Baptist minister, and a model.


title: Sonny Landham

text: Landham studied acting for two years at Pasadena Playhouse before moving to New York in 1968 to pursue a career in acting. At the beginning of his acting career, Landham was an actor in pornographic films. He also posed for nude layout for "Playgirl". He then became a mainstream movie actor and appeared in a number of Hollywood films, including "The Warriors" (1979) as a subway policeman whose leg gets broken by a baseball bat-wielding Michael Beck, "48 Hrs." (1982), "Predator" (1987), "Action Jackson" (1988), and "Lock Up" (1989).


title: Sonny Landham

text: In 2003, Landham ran in the Republican Party primary election for the post of Governor of Kentucky, hoping to repeat the success of his "Predator" castmates Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura and California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. He based his candidacy on opposition to an amendment which endorsed the Kentucky Family Court, saying his bad experiences at the hands of the family court had convinced him it was for the benefit of lawyers rather than families or children. He was unsuccessful in gaining the party's nomination. He ran briefly as an independent candidate, but withdrew on June 18, 2003, and endorsed the Republican slate.


title: Sonny Landham

text: In January 2004, Landham announced his candidacy for the 27th State Senate District of Kentucky. That year he was the keynote speaker at the official launch part of the radio show, "The Political Cesspool". In 2005, Landham spoke at the Council of Conservative Citizens (CofCC) convention.


title: Sonny Landham

text: On June 25, 2008, Landham announced his candidacy for the U.S. Senate seat held by Mitch McConnell, as a Libertarian.


title: Sonny Landham

text: On July 23, 2008, Landham appeared on the political radio show "The Weekly Filibuster", where he was asked, in relation to past comments of his quoted in the "Louisville Courier-Journal", if was calling for the genocide of Arab people. He replied, "I call for outright bombing them back into the sand until they surrender and if they don’t surrender, then you continue the war. Because if you don’t, you will never have peace in the United States. Now do you want peace in the United States or do you want to live to some utopian ideals that are impossible in a world?" He further called for Arabs to be banned from entering the United States, and referred that ethnic group as "camel dung-shovelers", and when questioned on this, suggested using the epithets "rag-heads" and "camel jockeys". On July 28, the Kentucky Libertarian Party asked Landham to withdraw his nomination, citing those comments and explaining that his politics did not agree with their platform and values.


title: Sonny Landham

text: Landham was married five times. He had four children, including a son named William, and a daughter named Priscilla.


title: Sonny Landham

text: After being convicted on federal charges of making threatening and obscene phone calls to his wife, Landham spent three years in prison. However the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the conviction in May 2001.


title: Lewis gun

text: The Lewis gun (or Lewis automatic machine gun or Lewis automatic rifle) is a First World War–era light machine gun. Designed privately in the United States though not adopted there, the design was finalised and mass-produced in the United Kingdom, and widely used by troops of the British Empire during the war. It had a distinctive barrel cooling shroud (containing a finned, aluminium breech-to-muzzle heat sink to cool the gun barrel) and top-mounted pan magazine. The Lewis served to the end of the Korean War, and was widely used as an aircraft machine gun during both World Wars, almost always with the cooling shroud removed, as air flow during flight offers sufficient cooling.


title: Lewis gun

text: A predecessor to the Lewis gun incorporating the principles upon which it was based was designed by Ferdinand Mannlicher. The Lewis gun was invented by U.S. Army colonel Isaac Newton Lewis in 1911, based on initial work by Samuel Maclean. Despite its origins, the Lewis gun was not initially adopted by the U.S. military, most likely because of political differences between Lewis and General William Crozier, the chief of the Ordnance Department. Lewis became frustrated with trying to persuade the U.S. Army to adopt his design, "slapped by rejections from ignorant hacks", in his words, and retired from the army.


title: Lewis gun

text: Lewis left the United States in 1913 and went to Belgium, where he established the Armes Automatique Lewis company in Liège to facilitate commercial production of the gun. Lewis had been working closely with British arms manufacturer the Birmingham Small Arms Company Limited (BSA) in an effort to overcome some of the production difficulties of the weapon. The Belgians bought a small number of Lewis guns in 1913, using the .303 British round and, in 1914, BSA purchased a licence to manufacture the Lewis machine gun in England, which resulted in Lewis receiving significant royalty payments and becoming very wealthy.


title: Lewis gun

text: Lewis and his factory moved to England before 1914, away from possible seizure in the event of a German invasion.


title: Lewis gun

text: The onset of the First World War increased demand for the Lewis gun, and BSA began production, under the designation "Model 1914". The design was officially approved for service on 15 October 1915 under the designation "Gun, Lewis, .303-cal." No Lewis guns were produced in Belgium during the war; all manufacture was carried out by BSA in England and the Savage Arms Company in the US.


title: Lewis gun

text: The Lewis was produced by BSA and Savage Arms during the war, and although the two versions were largely similar, enough differences existed to stop them being completely interchangeable, although this was rectified by the time of the Second World War.


title: Lewis gun

text: The major difference between the two designs was that the BSA weapons were chambered for .303 British ammunition, whereas the Savage guns were chambered for .30-06 cartridges, which necessitated some difference in the magazine, feed mechanism, bolt, barrel, extractors, and gas operation system. Savage did make Lewis guns in .303 British calibre, though. The Model 1916 and Model 1917 were exported to Canada and the United Kingdom, and a few were supplied to the US military, particularly the Navy. The Savage Model 1917 was generally produced in .30-06 calibre. A number of these guns were supplied to the UK under lend-lease during the Second World War.


title: Lewis gun

text: The Lewis gun was gas operated. A portion of the expanding propellant gas was tapped off from the barrel, driving a piston to the rear against a spring. The piston was fitted with a vertical post at its rear which rode in a helical cam track in the bolt, rotating it at the end of its travel nearest the breech. This allowed the three locking lugs at the rear of the bolt to engage in recesses in the gun's body to lock it into place. The post also carried a fixed firing pin, which protruded through an aperture in the front of the bolt, firing the next round at the foremost part of the piston's travel.


title: Lewis gun

text: The gun's aluminum barrel-shroud caused the muzzle blast to draw air over the barrel and cool it, due to the muzzle-to-breech, radially finned aluminum heat sink within the shroud's barrel, and protruding behind the shroud's aft end, running lengthwise in contact with the gun barrel (somewhat like the later American M1917/18 Marlin-Rockwell machine gun's similar gun barrel cooling design) from the "bottleneck" near the shroud's muzzle end and protruding externally behind the shroud's rear end. Some discussion occurred over whether the shroud was really necessary—in the Second World War, many old aircraft guns that did not have the tubing were issued to antiaircraft units of the British Home Guard and to British airfields, and others were used on vehicle mounts in the Western Desert; all were found to function properly without it, which led to the suggestion that Lewis had insisted on the cooling arrangement largely to show that his design was different from Maclean's earlier prototypes. Only the Royal Navy retained the tube/heatsink cooling system on their deck-mounted AA-configuration Lewis guns.


title: Lewis gun

text: The Lewis gun used a pan magazine holding 47 or 97 rounds. Pan magazines hold the ammunition nose-inwards toward the center, in a radial fan. Unlike the more common drum magazines, which hold the rounds parallel to the axis and are fed by spring tension, pan magazines are mechanically indexed. The Lewis magazine was driven by a cam on top of the bolt which operated a pawl mechanism via a lever.


title: Lewis gun

text: An interesting point of the design was that it did not use a traditional helical coiled recoil spring, but used a spiral spring, much like a large clock spring, in a semicircular housing just in front of the trigger. The operating rod had a toothed underside, which engaged with a cog which wound the spring. When the gun fired, the bolt recoiled and the cog was turned, tightening the spring until the resistance of the spring had reached the recoil force of the bolt assembly. At that moment, as the gas pressure in the breech fell, the spring unwound, turning the cog, which, in turn, wound the operating rod forward for the next round. As with a clock spring, the Lewis gun recoil spring had an adjustment device to alter the recoil resistance for variations in temperature and wear. Unusual as it seems, the Lewis design proved reliable and was even copied by the Japanese and used extensively by them during the Second World War.


title: Lewis gun

text: The gun's cyclic rate of fire was about 500–600 rounds per minute. A recoil enhancer was added to the 1918 aircraft gun variant (and refitted to many 1917 models) which increased the rate of fire to about 800 rounds per minute. The ground use versions weighed 28 lb (12.7 kg), only about half as much as a typical medium machine gun of the era, such as the Vickers machine gun, and was chosen in part because, being more portable than a heavy machine gun, it could be carried and used by one soldier. BSA even produced at least one model (the "B.S.A. Light Infantry Pattern Lewis Gun", which lacked the aluminium barrel shroud and had a wooden fore grip) designed as a form of assault rifle.


title: Lewis gun

text: During the first days of the war, the Belgian Army had put in service 20 prototypes (5 in 7.65×53mm and 15 in .303) for the defense of Namur.


title: Lewis gun

text: The United Kingdom officially adopted the Lewis gun in .303 British calibre for land and aircraft use in October 1915. The weapon began to be issued to the British Army's infantry battalions on the Western Front in early 1916 as a replacement for the heavier and less mobile Vickers machine gun, which had been withdrawn from the infantry for use by the specialist Machine Gun Corps. The US Navy and Marine Corps followed in early 1917, adopting the M1917 Lewis gun (produced by the Savage Arms Co.), in .30-06 calibre.


title: Lewis gun

text: Notes made during his training in 1918 by Arthur Bullock, a private soldier in the 2/4th Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Light Infantry, record that the chief advantage of the gun was 'its invulnerability' and its chief disadvantages were 'its delicacy, the fact that it is useless for setting up a barrage, and also that the system of air cooling employed does not allow of more than 12 magazines being fired continuously'. He records its weight as 26 lbs unloaded and 30½ lbs loaded (though later he mentions that it weighed 35 lbs loaded), and that it had 47 cartridges in a fully loaded magazine; also that it was supported by a bipod in front and by the operator's shoulder at the rear. About six months into his service, Bullock was sent on Lewis gun refresher course at La Lacque, and he recalled that the rigour of the training meant that 'everyone passed out 100 percent efficient, the meaning of which will be appreciated when I say that part of the final test was to strip down the gun completely and then, blindfolded, put those 104 parts together again correctly in just one minute.'The gun was operated by a team of seven. Bullock was the First Lewis Gunner who carried the gun and a revolver, while 'The Second Gunner carried a bag containing spare parts, and the remaining five members of the team carried loaded pans of ammunition'. Bullock noted, 'all could fire the gun if required, and all could effect repairs in seconds'. Bullock provides several vivid descriptions of the gun's use in combat. For example, on 13 April 1918 he and his fellow soldiers intercepted a German advance along the Calonne/Robecq road, noting 'we fired the gun in turns until it was too hot to hold' and recording that 400 German casualties were caused, 'chiefly by my Lewis gun!'.


title: Lewis gun

text: The US Army never officially adopted the weapon for infantry use and even went so far as to take Lewis guns away from US Marines arriving in France and replace them with the Chauchat LMG—a practice believed to be related to General Crozier's dislike of Lewis and his gun. The divisions of the US II Corps attached to the British Army were equipped with the gun. The US Army eventually adopted the Browning Automatic Rifle in 1917 (although it was September 1918 before any of the new guns reached the front). The US Navy and Marine Corps continued to use the .30-06 calibre Lewis until the early part of the Second World War.


title: Lewis gun

text: The Russian Empire purchased 10,000 Lewis guns in 1917 from the British government, and ordered another 10,000 weapons from Savage Arms in the US. The US government was unwilling to supply the Tsarist Russian government with the guns and some doubt exists as to whether they were actually delivered, although records indicate that 5,982 Savage weapons were delivered to Russia by 31 March 1917. The Lewis guns supplied by Britain were dispatched to Russia in May 1917, but it is not known for certain whether these were the Savage-made weapons being trans-shipped through the UK, or a separate batch of UK-produced units. White armies in Northwest Russia received several hundred Lewis guns in 1918–1919.


title: Lewis gun

text: British Mark IV tanks used the Lewis, replacing the Vickers and Hotchkiss used in earlier tanks. The Lewis was chosen for its relatively compact magazines, but the ventilation system inside the tank caused the airflow to be reversed through the Lewis cooling jacket, resulting in hot air and fumes being blown into the gunner's face. As soon as an improved magazine belt for the Hotchkiss was developed, the Lewis was replaced by them in later tank models.


title: Lewis gun

text: As their enemies used the mobility of the gun to ambush German raiding parties, the Germans nicknamed the Lewis "the Belgian Rattlesnake". They used captured Lewis guns in both World Wars, and included instruction in its operation and care as part of their machine-gun crew training.


title: Lewis gun

text: Despite costing more than a Vickers gun to manufacture (the cost of a Lewis gun was £165 in 1915 and £175 in 1918; the Vickers cost about £100), Lewis machine guns were in high demand with the British military during the First World War. The Lewis also had the advantage of being about 80% faster to build than the Vickers, and was a lot more portable. Accordingly, the British government placed orders for 3,052 guns between August 1914 and June 1915. Lewis guns outnumbered the Vickers by a ratio of about 3:1.


title: Lewis gun

text: The Lewis gun has the distinction of being the first machine gun fired from an aeroplane; on 7 June 1912, Captain Charles Chandler of the US Army fired a prototype Lewis gun from the foot-bar of a Wright Model B Flyer.


title: Lewis gun

text: Lewis guns were used extensively on British and French aircraft during the First World War, as either an observer's or gunner's weapon or an additional weapon to the more common Vickers. The Lewis's popularity as an aircraft machine gun was partly due to its low weight, the fact that it was air-cooled and that it used self-contained 97-round drum magazines. Because of this, the Lewis was first mounted on the Vickers F.B.5 "Gunbus", which was probably the world's first purpose-built combat aircraft when it entered service in August 1914, replacing the Vickers machine gun used on earlier experimental versions. It was also fitted on two early production examples of the Bristol Scout C aircraft by Lanoe Hawker in the summer of 1915, mounted on the port side and firing forwards and outwards at a 30° angle to avoid the propeller arc.


title: Lewis gun

text: The problem in mounting a Lewis to fire forward in most single-engined tractor configuration fighters was due to the open bolt firing cycle of the Lewis, which prevented it from being synchronized to fire directly forward through the propeller arc of such aircraft; only the unusual French SPAD S.A "pulpit plane" which possessed a unique hinged gunner's nacelle immediately "ahead" of the propeller (and the pilot), and the British "pusher" fighters Vickers F.B.5, Airco D.H.2, Royal Aircraft Factory F.E.2 and F.E.8 could readily use the Lewis as direct forward-firing armament early in the war. Some British single-engined "tractor" fighters used a Foster mounting on the top wing to elevate a Lewis gun above the propeller arc for unsynchronized firing, including production S.E.5/S.E.5a fighters and field-modified examples of the Avro 504. For the use of observers or rear gunners, the Lewis was mounted on a Scarff ring, which allowed the gun to be rotated and elevated whilst supporting the gun's weight.


title: Lewis gun

text: Until September 1916 Zeppelin airships were very difficult to attack successfully at high altitude, although this also made accurate bombing impossible. Aeroplanes struggled to reach a typical altitude of , and firing the solid bullets usually used by aircraft Lewis guns was ineffectual: they made small holes causing inconsequential gas leaks. Britain developed new bullets, the Brock containing spontaneously igniting potassium chlorate, and the Buckingham filled with pyrophoric phosphorus, to set fire to the Zeppelin's hydrogen. These had become available by September 1916. When combined with explosive Pomeroy bullets which ripped open the envelopes, they proved very successful, and Lewis guns loaded with a mixture of Pomeroy, Brock and Buckingham ammunition were often employed for balloon-busting against German Zeppelins, other airships and "Drache" barrage balloons.


title: Lewis gun

text: On the French Nieuport 11 and later Nieuport 17 sesquiplanes, a Lewis gun was mounted above the top wing (in a similar way as fitted to the British S.E.5a) – sometimes on a Foster mount, which allowed firing directly forward outside the propeller arc. The Foster mount usually incorporated an arc-shaped I-beam rail as its rearmost structural member, that a Lewis gun could be slid backwards and downwards along the rail towards the cockpit, to allow the ammunition drum to be changed in flight – but RFC fighter ace Albert Ball VC also understood that the Lewis gun in such a mount also retained its original trigger, and could thus be fired upwards. He used the upward firing Lewis to attack solitary German two-seater aircraft from below and behind, where the observer could not see him or fire back. It was his use of the weapon in this way, in a Nieuport, that led to its later introduction on the S.E.5/S.E.5a: Ball had acted in a consultant capacity on the development of this aeroplane. The later Sopwith Dolphin, already armed with twin synchronized Vickers guns just forward of the pilot and just above its V-8 engine, could also use one or two Lewis guns mounted on the forward crossbar of its cabane structure, between the top wing panels, as an anti-Zeppelin measure. A few of the Dolphins in use with No. 87 Squadron RAF in the summer of 1918, alternatively mounted their twin Lewises atop the lower wings just inboard of the inner wing struts for an additional pair of forward-firing machine guns; in such a field-achieved configuration, however, neither gun-jam clearing, nor drum magazine replacement were possible on their Lewises during a mission.


title: Lewis gun

text: Lewis guns were also carried as defensive guns on British airships. The SS class blimps carried one gun. The larger NS class blimps carried two or three guns in the control car and some were fitted with an additional gun and a gunner's position at the top of the gasbag.


title: Lewis gun

text: By the Second World War, the British Army had replaced the Lewis gun with the Bren gun for most infantry use. As an airborne weapon, the Lewis was largely supplanted by the Vickers K, a weapon that could achieve over twice the rate of fire of the Lewis.


title: Lewis gun

text: In the crisis following the Fall of France, where a large part of the British Army's equipment had been lost up to and at Dunkirk, stocks of Lewis guns in both .303 and .30-06 were hurriedly pressed back into service, primarily for Home Guard, airfield defence and anti-aircraft use. 58,983 Lewis guns were taken from stores, repaired, refitted and issued by the British during the course of the war. In addition to their reserve weapon role in the UK, they also saw front-line use with the Dutch, British, Australian, and New Zealand forces in the early years of the Pacific campaign against the Japanese. The Lewis gun saw continued service as an anti-aircraft weapon during the war; in this role, it was credited by the British for bringing down more low-flying enemy aircraft than any other AA weapon. Peter White indicates that his battalion of the King's Own Scottish Borderers was still using the Lewis on Universal Carriers in 1945. Royal Naval Commandos were also designated use of the weapon for their beach parties.


title: Lewis gun

text: At the start of the Second World War, the Lewis was the Royal Navy's standard close-range air defence weapon. It could be found on major warships, armed trawlers and defensively equipped merchant ships. It was often used in twin mountings and a quadruple mount was developed for motor torpedo boats. British submarines generally carried two guns on single mounts. Although it was gradually replaced by the Oerlikon 20 mm cannon, new corvettes were still being fitted with twin Lewises as late as 1942. Lewis guns were also carried by the Royal Air Force's air-sea rescue launches.


title: Lewis gun

text: American forces used the Lewis gun (in .30-06 calibre) throughout the war. The US Navy used the weapon on armed merchant cruisers, small auxiliary ships, landing craft and submarines. The US Coast Guard also used the Lewis on their vessels. It was never officially adopted by the US Army for anything other than aircraft use.


title: Lewis gun

text: The Germans used captured British Lewis guns during the war under the designation MG 137(e), whilst the Japanese copied the Lewis design and employed it extensively during the war; it was designated the Type 92 and chambered for a 7.7 mm rimmed cartridge that was interchangeable with the .303 British round.


title: Lewis gun

text: The Lewis was officially withdrawn from British service in 1946, but continued to be used by forces operating against the United Nations in the Korean War. It was also used against French and US forces in the First Indochina War and the subsequent Vietnam War.


title: Lewis gun

text: Total production of the Lewis gun during the Second World War by BSA was over 145,000 units, a total of 3,550 guns were produced by the Savage Arms Co. for US service—2,500 in .30-06 and 1,050 in .303 British calibre.


title: Lewis gun

text: A commercial venture in 1921 by the Birmingham Small Arms Company was a version which fired the 12.7×81mm (0.5-inch Vickers) ammunition, intended for use against aircraft and tanks. At around the same time, BSA developed the Light Infantry Model which had a 22-round magazine and a wooden fore-stock in place of the radiator fins and shroud; it was intended to be used in a similar way to the Browning Automatic Rifle. Another development was a twin Lewis for aircraft use in which the bodies of the two weapons were joined side-by-side and the drum magazines were mounted vertically, one on each side. None of these projects was accepted by any armed forces.


title: Lewis gun

text: Lewis had also experimented with lighter, 30-06 calibre, box magazine-fed infantry rifle variants intended for shoulder or hip fire as a competition to the BAR. They were dubbed "Assault Phase Rifle" – what could be understood as the first use of the term "Assault Rifle", despite the weapon being, by today's designation, a battle rifle. Despite being three pounds lighter than it and loaded with very forward-thinking features for the time (such as an ambidexterous magazine release), the U.S. Army still chose to adopt the BAR.


title: Lewis gun

text: A short-barrelled light machine gun variant was developed at the start of the Second World War. It came with a hand guard and was fed from a 30-round Bren magazines; however, it was decided by the British authorities to concentrate production on the Bren, which had the advantage of a changeable barrel.


title: Lewis gun

text: The German FG 42 paratrooper's rifle used the Lewis gun's gas assembly and bolt design which were in turn incorporated into the M60 machine gun.


title: Lewis gun

text: The Type 92 machine gun, the standard hand-held machine gun used by Imperial Japanese Navy aircraft gunners in WWII, was essentially a copy of the Lewis gun.


title: Lewis gun

text: The Russian PKP Pecheneg machine gun uses a streamlined version of the Lewis gun's forced air cooling in a fixed heavy barrel. This enables the Pecheneg to fire more than 600 rounds through the barrel without warping.


title: Drinking water

text: Drinking water is water that is used in drink or food preparation; potable water is water that is safe to be used as drinking water. The amount of drinking water required to maintain good health varies, and depends on physical activity level, age, health-related issues, and environmental conditions. Recent work showed that the most important driver of water turnover which is closely linked to water requirements is energy expenditure. For those who work in a hot climate, up to a day may be required. Typically in developed countries, tap water meets drinking water quality standards, even though only a small proportion is actually consumed or used in food preparation. Other typical uses for tap water include washing, toilets, and irrigation. Greywater may also be used for toilets or irrigation. Its use for irrigation however may be associated with risks. Water may also be unacceptable due to levels of toxins or suspended solids.


title: Drinking water

text: Globally, by 2015, 89% of people had access to water from a source that is suitable for drinkingcalled "improved water source". In sub-Saharan Africa, access to potable water ranged from 40% to 80% of the population. Nearly 4.2 billion people worldwide had access to tap water, while another 2.4 billion had access to wells or public taps. The World Health Organization considers access to safe drinking-water a basic human right.


title: Drinking water

text: About 1 to 2 billion people lack safe drinking water. Water can carry vectors of disease. More people die from unsafe water than from war, then-U.N. secretary-general Ban Ki-moon said in 2010. Third world countries are most affected by lack of water, flooding, and water quality. Up to 80 percent of illnesses in developing countries are the direct result of inadequate water and sanitation. According to a report by UNICEF and UNESCO, Finland has the best drinking water quality in the world.


title: Drinking water

text: Water covers approximately 70% of the Earth's surface, where approximately 97.2% of it is saline, only 2.8% fresh. Potable water is available in almost all populated areas of the Earth, although it may be expensive and the supply may not always be sustainable. Sources where water may be obtained include springs, hyporheic zones and aquifers, and:


title: Drinking water

text: Threats for the availability of water resources include: water scarcity, water pollution, water conflict, insufficient well-depth, droughts and overpumping, and the effects of climate change.


title: Drinking water

text: The amount of drinking water required per day is variable. It depends on physical activity, age, health, and environmental conditions. In the United States, the Adequate Intake for total water, based on median intakes, is per day for human males older than 18, and per day for human females older than 18 which includes about 80% from beverages and 20% from food. The European Food Safety Authority recommends of total water per day for adult women and per day for adult men. The common advice to drink 8 glasses () of plain water per day is not based on science, and an individual's thirst provides a better guide for how much water they require rather than a specific, fixed quantity. Americans age 21 and older, on average, drink of drinking water a day and 95% drink less than per day. Physical exercise and heat exposure cause loss of water and therefore may induce thirst and greater water intake. Physically active individuals in hot climates may have total daily water needs of or more.


title: Drinking water

text: The drinking water contribution to mineral nutrients intake is also unclear. Inorganic minerals generally enter surface water and ground water via storm water runoff or through the Earth's crust. Treatment processes also lead to the presence of some minerals. Examples include calcium, zinc, manganese, phosphate, fluoride and sodium compounds. Water generated from the biochemical metabolism of nutrients provides a significant proportion of the daily water requirements for some arthropods and desert animals, but provides only a small fraction of a human's necessary intake. There are a variety of trace elements present in virtually all potable water, some of which play a role in metabolism. For example, sodium, potassium and chloride are common chemicals found in small quantities in most waters, and these elements play a role in body metabolism. Other elements such as fluoride, while beneficial in low concentrations, can cause dental problems and other issues when present at high levels.


title: Drinking water

text: Fluid balance is key. Profuse sweating can increase the need for electrolyte (salt) replacement. Water intoxication (which results in hyponatremia), the process of consuming too much water too quickly, can be fatal. Water makes up about 60% of the body weight in men and 55% of weight in women. A baby is composed of about 70% to 80% water while the elderly are composed of around 45%.


title: Drinking water

text: In the United States, the typical water consumption per capita, at home, is of water per day. Of this, only 1% of the water provided by public water suppliers is for drinking and cooking. Uses include (in decreasing order) toilets, washing machines, showers, baths, faucets, and leaks.


title: Drinking water

text: The qualitative and quantitative aspects of drinking water requirements on domesticated animals are studied and described within the context of animal husbandry. However, relatively few studies have been focused on the drinking behavior of wild animals.


title: Drinking water

text: The most efficient and convenient way to transport and deliver potable water is through pipes. Plumbing can require significant capital investment. Some systems suffer high operating costs. The cost to replace the deteriorating water and sanitation infrastructure of industrialized countries may be as high as $200 billion a year. Leakage of untreated and treated water from pipes reduces access to water. Leakage rates of 50% are not uncommon in urban systems.


title: Drinking water

text: Springs are often used as sources for bottled waters. Tap water, delivered by domestic water systems refers to water piped to homes and delivered to a tap or spigot. For these water sources to be consumed safely, they must receive adequate treatment and meet drinking water regulations.


title: Drinking water

text: Because of the high initial investments, many less wealthy nations cannot afford to develop or sustain appropriate infrastructure, and as a consequence people in these areas may spend a correspondingly higher fraction of their income on water. 2003 statistics from El Salvador, for example, indicate that the poorest 20% of households spend more than 10% of their total income on water. In the United Kingdom, authorities define spending of more than 3% of one's income on water as a hardship.


title: Drinking water

text: According to the World Health Organization's 2017 report, "safe" drinking-water is water that "does not represent any significant risk to health over a lifetime of consumption, including different sensitivities that may occur between life stages".


title: Drinking water

text: Parameters for drinking water quality typically fall within three categories: physical, chemical, microbiological.


title: Drinking water

text: Physical and chemical parameters include heavy metals, trace organic compounds, total suspended solids, and turbidity. Chemical parameters tend to pose more of a chronic health risk through buildup of heavy metals although some components like nitrates/nitrites and arsenic can have a more immediate impact. Physical parameters affect the aesthetics and taste of the drinking water and may complicate the removal of microbial pathogens.


title: Drinking water

text: Microbiological parameters include coliform bacteria, "E. coli", and specific pathogenic species of bacteria (such as cholera-causing "Vibrio cholerae"), viruses, and protozoan parasites. Originally, fecal contamination was determined with the presence of coliform bacteria, a convenient marker for a class of harmful fecal pathogens. The presence of fecal coliforms (like "E. Coli") serves as an indication of contamination by sewage. Additional contaminants include protozoan oocysts such as "Cryptosporidium sp.", "Giardia lamblia", "Legionella", and viruses (enteric). Microbial pathogenic parameters are typically of greatest concern because of their immediate health risk.


title: Drinking water

text: Throughout most of the world, the most common contamination of raw water sources is from human sewage in particular human fecal pathogens and parasites. In 2006, waterborne diseases were estimated to cause 1.8 million deaths while about 1.1 billion people lacked proper drinking water. In parts of the world, the only sources of water are from small streams that are often directly contaminated by sewage.


title: Drinking water

text: Pesticides, whether used in agriculture or domestically (e.g. homes, schools, businesses) are potential drinking water contaminants. Pesticides may be present in drinking water in low concentrations, but the toxicity of the chemical and the extent of human exposure are factors that are used to determine the specific health risk.


title: Drinking water

text: Perfluorinated alkylated substances (PFAS) are a group of synthetic compounds used in a large variety of consumer products, such as food packaging, waterproof fabrics, carpeting and cookware. PFAS are known to persist in the environment and are commonly described as persistent organic pollutants. PFAS chemicals have been detected in blood, both humans and animals, worldwide, as well as in food products, water, air and soil. Animal testing studies with PFAS have shown effects on growth and development, and possibly effects on reproduction, thyroid, the immune system and liver. As of 2022 the health impacts of many PFAS compounds are not understood. Scientists are conducting research to determine the extent and severity of impacts from PFAS on human health. PFAS have been widely detected in drinking water worldwide and regulations have been developed, or are under development, in many countries.


title: Drinking water

text: Most water requires some treatment before use; even water from deep wells or springs. The extent of treatment depends on the source of the water. Appropriate technology options in water treatment include both community-scale and household-scale point-of-use (POU) designs. Only a few large urban areas such as Christchurch, New Zealand have access to sufficiently pure water of sufficient volume that no treatment of the raw water is required.


title: Drinking water

text: In emergency situations when conventional treatment systems have been compromised, waterborne pathogens may be killed or inactivated by boiling but this requires abundant sources of fuel, and can be very onerous on consumers, especially where it is difficult to store boiled water in sterile conditions. Other techniques, such as filtration, chemical disinfection, and exposure to ultraviolet radiation (including solar UV) have been demonstrated in an array of randomized control trials to significantly reduce levels of water-borne disease among users in low-income countries, but these suffer from the same problems as boiling methods.


title: Drinking water

text: Another type of water treatment is called desalination and is used mainly in dry areas with access to large bodies of saltwater.


title: Drinking water

text: The ability of point of use (POU) options to reduce disease is a function of both their ability to remove microbial pathogens if properly applied and such social factors as ease of use and cultural appropriateness. Technologies may generate more (or less) health benefit than their lab-based microbial removal performance would suggest.


title: Drinking water

text: The current priority of the proponents of POU treatment is to reach large numbers of low-income households on a sustainable basis. Few POU measures have reached significant scale thus far, but efforts to promote and commercially distribute these products to the world's poor have only been under way for a few years.


title: Drinking water

text: Solar water disinfection is a low-cost method of purifying water that can often be implemented with locally available materials. Unlike methods that rely on firewood, it has low impact on the environment.


title: Drinking water

text: According to the World Health Organization (WHO), "access to safe drinking-water is essential to health, a basic human right and a component of effective policy for health protection." In 1990, only 76 percent of the global population had access to drinking water. By 2015 that number had increased to 91 percent. In 1990, most countries in Latin America, East and South Asia, and Sub-Saharan Africa were well below 90%. In Sub-Saharan Africa, where the rates are lowest, household access ranges from 40 to 80 percent. Countries that experience violent conflict can have reductions in drinking water access: One study found that a conflict with about 2,500 battle deaths deprives 1.8% of the population of potable water.


title: Drinking water

text: By 2015, 5.2 billion people representing 71% of the global population used safely managed drinking water services. As of 2017, 90% of people having access to water from a source that is suitable for drinkingcalled "improved water source"and 71% of the world could access safely managed drinking water that is clean and available on-demand. Estimates suggest that at least 25% of improved sources contain fecal contamination. 1.8 billion people still use an unsafe drinking water source which may be contaminated by feces. This can result in infectious diseases, such as gastroenteritis, cholera, and typhoid, among others. Reduction of waterborne diseases and development of safe water resources is a major public health goal in developing countries. Bottled water is sold for public consumption in most parts of the world.


title: Drinking water

text: Improved sources are also monitored based on whether water is available when needed (5.8 billion people), located on premises (5.4 billion), free from contamination (5.4 billion), and within a 30-minute round trip. While improved water sources such as protected piped water are more likely to provide safe and adequate water as they may prevent contact with human excreta, for example, this is not always the case. According to a 2014 study, approximately 25% of improved sources contained fecal contamination.


title: Drinking water

text: The population in Australia, New Zealand, North America and Europe have achieved nearly universal basic drinking water services.


title: Drinking water

text: The WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program (JMP) for Water Supply and Sanitation is the official United Nations mechanism tasked with monitoring progress towards the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) relating to drinking-water and sanitation (MDG 7, Target 7c), which is to: "Halve, by 2015, the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking-water and basic sanitation".


title: Drinking water

text: Access to safe drinking water is indicated by safe water sources. These improved drinking water sources include household connection, public standpipe, borehole condition, protected dug well, protected spring, and rain water collection. Sources that do not encourage improved drinking water to the same extent as previously mentioned include: unprotected wells, unprotected springs, rivers or ponds, vender-provided water, bottled water (consequential of limitations in quantity, not quality of water), and tanker truck water. Access to sanitary water comes hand in hand with access to improved sanitation facilities for excreta, such as connection to public sewer, connection to septic system, or a pit latrine with a slab or water seal.


title: Drinking water

text: According to this indicator on improved water sources, the MDG was met in 2010, five years ahead of schedule. Over 2 billion more people used improved drinking water sources in 2010 than did in 1990. However, the job is far from finished. 780 million people are still without improved sources of drinking water, and many more people still lack safe drinking water. Estimates suggest that at least 25% of improved sources contain fecal contamination and an estimated 1.8 billion people globally use a source of drinking water that suffers from fecal contamination. The quality of these sources varies over time and often gets worse during the wet season. Continued efforts are needed to reduce urban-rural disparities and inequities associated with poverty; to dramatically increase safe drinking water coverage in countries in sub-Saharan Africa and Oceania; to promote global monitoring of drinking water quality; and to look beyond the MDG target towards universal coverage.


title: Drinking water

text: A "safely managed drinking water service" is "one located on premises, available when needed and free from contamination".


title: Drinking water

text: The terms 'improved water source' and 'unimproved water source' were coined in 2002 as a drinking water monitoring tool by the JMP of UNICEF and WHO. The term, improved water source refers to "piped water on premises (piped household water connection located inside the user’s dwelling, plot or yard), and other improved drinking water sources (public taps or standpipes, tube wells or boreholes, protected dug wells, protected springs, and rainwater collection)".


title: Drinking water

text: Expanding WASH (Water, Sanitation and Hygiene) coverage and monitoring in non-household settings such as schools, healthcare facilities, and work places, is included in Sustainable Development Goal 6.


title: Drinking water

text: WaterAid International is a non-governmental organization (NGO) that works on improving the availability of safe drinking water in some the world's poorest countries.


title: Drinking water

text: Sanitation and Water for All is a partnership that brings together national governments, donors, UN agencies, NGOs and other development partners. They work to improve sustainable access to sanitation and water supply to meet and go beyond the MDG target. In 2014, 77 countries had already met the MDG sanitation target, 29 were on track and, 79 were not on-track.


title: Drinking water

text: Contaminated water is estimated to result in more than half a million deaths per year. Contaminated water with the lack of sanitation was estimated to cause about one percent of disability adjusted life years worldwide in 2010. As contaminated water takes its toll on the health of those exposed, the duration of exposure plays a part in the effects of certain diseases.


title: Drinking water

text: Over 90% of deaths from diarrheal diseases in the developing world today occur in children under five years old. According to the WHO, the most common diseases linked with poor water quality are cholera, diarrhoea, dysentery, hepatitis A, typhoid, and polio. Malnutrition, especially protein-energy malnutrition, can decrease the children's resistance to infections, including water-related diarrheal diseases. Between 2000 and 2003, 769,000 children under five years old in sub-Saharan Africa died each year from diarrheal diseases. As a result from poor water quality and bad sanitation, an estimated 829,000 people die each year from diarrhoea. Only thirty-six percent of the population in the sub-Saharan region have access to proper means of sanitation. More than 2,000 children's lives are lost every day. In South Asia, 683,000 children under five years old died each year from diarrheal disease from 2000 to 2003. During the same period, in developed countries, 700 children under five years old died from diarrheal disease. Improved water supply reduces diarrhea morbidity by 25% and improvements in drinking water through proper storage in the home and chlorination reduces diarrhea episodes by 39%.


title: Drinking water

text: Some efforts at increasing the availability of safe drinking water have been disastrous. When the 1980s were declared the "International Decade of Water" by the United Nations, the assumption was made that groundwater is inherently safer than water from rivers, ponds, and canals. While instances of cholera, typhoid and diarrhea were reduced, other problems emerged due to polluted groundwater.


title: Drinking water

text: Sixty million people are estimated to have been poisoned by well water contaminated by excessive fluoride, which dissolved from granite rocks. The effects are particularly evident in the bone deformations of children. Similar or larger problems are anticipated in other countries including China, Uzbekistan, and Ethiopia. Although helpful for dental health in low dosage, fluoride in large amounts interferes with bone formation.


title: Drinking water

text: Half of Bangladesh's 12 million tube wells contain unacceptable levels of arsenic due to the wells not dug deep enough (past 100 meters). The Bangladeshi government had spent less than US$7 million of the 34 million allocated for solving the problem by the World Bank in 1998. Natural arsenic poisoning is a global threat with 140 million people affected in 70 countries globally. These examples illustrate the need to examine each location on a case-by-case basis and not assume what works in one area will work in another.


title: Drinking water

text: Guidelines for the assessment and improvement of service activities relating to drinking water have been published in the form of drinking water quality standards such as ISO 24510.


title: Drinking water

text: For example, the EU sets legislation on water quality. "Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy", known as the water framework directive, is the primary piece of legislation governing water. This drinking water directive relates specifically to water intended for human consumption. Each member state is responsible for establishing the required policing measures to ensure that the legislation is implemented. For example, in the UK the Water Quality Regulations prescribe maximum values for substances that affect wholesomeness and the Drinking Water Inspectorate polices the water companies.


title: Drinking water

text: In the United States, public water systems, defined as systems that serve more than 25 customers or 15 service connections, are regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Safe Drinking Water Act. As of 2019 the EPA has issued 88 standards for microorganisms, chemicals and radionuclides. The Food and Drug Administration regulates bottled water as a food product under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. All public water suppliers in the US must uphold a certain standard of water quality. If the requirements are met, Americans can drink their local tap water.


title: You're So Vain

text: "You're So Vain" is a song written in 1971 by American singer and songwriter Carly Simon and released in November 1972. It is one of the songs with which Simon is most identified, and upon its release, reached No. 1 in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The song is ranked at No. 92 on "Billboard"<nowiki>'</nowiki>s Greatest Songs of All Time. "You're So Vain" was voted No. 216 in RIAA's Songs of the Century, and in August 2014, the UK's Official Charts Company crowned it the ultimate song of the 1970s. In 2021, the song was ranked 495th on Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Songs of All Time. The song was nominated for Song of the Year, Record of the Year, and Best Female Pop Vocal Performance at the 16th Annual Grammy Awards.


title: You're So Vain

text: The song is a critical profile of a self-absorbed lover about whom Simon asserts "You're so vain, you probably think this song is about you." The title subject's identity has long been a matter of speculation, with Simon stating that the song refers to three men, only one of whom she has named publicly: Warren Beatty.


title: You're So Vain

text: The distinctive bass guitar intro is played by Klaus Voormann. The strings were arranged by Simon and orchestrated by Paul Buckmaster, and Simon plays piano on the track.


title: You're So Vain

text: Long before Simon recorded what would be known as "You're So Vain", the song was titled "Bless You, Ben". The first words were, "Bless you, Ben. You came in when nobody else left off." Simon felt dissatisfied with the lyrics and put the song away until she attended a party one night where a famous guest appeared. A friend told Simon the male guest entered as if he was "walking onto a yacht". Simon incorporated the words into the melody of "Bless You, Ben" as she was composing on her piano, and the song took on a whole new meaning.


title: You're So Vain

text: Before the song became a hit single in 1972, Simon told an interviewer that the song was about "men", not a specific "man".


title: You're So Vain

text: In 1983, she said the song was not about Mick Jagger, who contributed uncredited backing vocals to it. In a 1993 book, Angie Bowie claimed to be the "wife of a close friend" mentioned in "You're So Vain", and that Jagger, for a time, had been "obsessed" with her. Simon made another comment about the subject's identity as a guest artist on Janet Jackson's 2001 single, "Son of a Gun (I Betcha Think This Song Is About You)", which sampled "You're So Vain". Simon said about the song, "The apricot scarf was worn by Nick [Delbanco]. Nothing in the words referred to Mick [Jagger]."


title: You're So Vain

text: Shortly before the writing of the song, Simon was married to James Taylor; she has said that he was "definitely not" the subject of the song. David Bowie, David Cassidy and Cat Stevens have all been cited by the press as speculative candidates.


title: You're So Vain

text: In August 2003, Simon agreed to reveal the name of the song's subject to the highest bidder of the Martha's Vineyard Possible Dreams charity auction. With the top bid of $50,000, Dick Ebersol, president of NBC Sports and a friend of Simon, won the right to know the name of the subject of "You're So Vain". A condition of the prize was that Ebersol not reveal the name. Ebersol said Simon allowed him to divulge a clue about the person's name: "Carly told me that I could offer up to the entire world a clue as to what she'll tell me when we have this night in about two weeks. And the clue is: The letter 'E' is in the person's name."


title: You're So Vain

text: Over the years Simon has divulged "letter clues". In 2004, Simon told Regis Philbin, "If I tell it, it's going to come out in dribs and drabs. And I've given out two letters already, an 'A' and an 'E'. But I'm going to add one to it. I'm going to add an 'R' in honor of you."


title: You're So Vain

text: In a 2007 interview, Warren Beatty said, "Let's be honest. That song was about me." Simon had said in 1983 that Beatty "certainly thought it was about him—he called me and said thanks for the song..." In an interview for the 1978/1982 version of "The History of Rock and Roll" radio series, producer Richard Perry said that Simon was essentially referring to Beatty while also evoking other previous relationships in her life.


title: You're So Vain

text: Howard Stern stated that Simon had privately revealed to him about whom the song was written after her interview on his popular radio show on Sirius Satellite Radio. Stern commented, "There is an odd aspect to it... he's not that vain." He also stated that she had said it was a "composite of three people." Simon confirmed that she has given the names to a few people, including Stern.


title: You're So Vain

text: In her 2008 book "Girls Like Us", author Sheila Weller includes a detailed account of Simon's love affair with musician Dan Armstrong, and suggests that he was the inspiration for "You're So Vain". Her heartbreak over eventually losing him inspired the song "Dan, My Fling", which appears on her first album. Armstrong's full name, Daniel Kent Armstrong, contains all three letters of Simon's clue.


title: You're So Vain

text: In a November 4, 2009, interview on WNYC, Simon said she had hidden the name of the subject in a then-new recording of the song. The next day, the program's crew detected the name "David" concealed in a back-played whisper. However, Simon contradicted this, saying she had spoken "Ovid" both forwards and backwards, and that sounded like David. In February 2010, Simon reiterated that the name of the subject was whispered in a re-recording of "You're So Vain": "There's a little whisper—and it's the answer to the puzzle." A representative for Simon stated that the name whispered during the song is "David". Multiple media outlets then speculated that the subject was Elektra Records executive, David Geffen, which Jim Hart, Simon's ex-husband and close friend, denied the following day. Simon said that when she wrote the song in 1971, she had not yet met Geffen. Simon's publicist also confirmed the song was not about Geffen, but that there was indeed "a David who is connected to the song in some way, shape, or form". "Vanity Fair" noted that in addition to "David", "Warren" and an unintelligible name are whispered during the recording.


title: You're So Vain

text: After her live performance of the song with Simon in July 2013, Taylor Swift stated that Simon had revealed the identity of the song's subject to her in confidence.


title: You're So Vain

text: In November 2015, Simon, promoting her about-to-be-published memoirs, said, "I have confirmed that the second verse is Warren (Beatty)" and added that "Warren thinks the whole thing is about him". Simon added to the mystery by including “Now, that doesn't mean that the other two verses aren't also about Warren,” she told the BBC. “It just means that the second one is.” The song originally had a fourth verse, possibly including another subject.


title: You're So Vain

text: The song was a No.1 hit in the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, and reached No.4 in Ireland and South Africa. Entering at No.99 on the "Billboard" Hot 100 on 2 December 1972, the song took five more weeks to rise to the top of the chart, where it stayed for the first three weeks of 1973. It was replaced by Stevie Wonder's "Superstition" and spent the next month in the runner-up spot. It also spent two weeks at the top of the Easy Listening chart in early 1973, her first No.1 on either chart. "You're So Vain" was Simon's breakthrough hit in the United Kingdom, reaching No.3 on the UK chart on its original release in 1973. The song was re-released in the UK in 1991 to cash in on its inclusion in a commercial for Dunlop Tyres, peaking at No.41.


title: You're So Vain

text: Mick Jagger contributed uncredited backing vocals for the song. When asked how this collaboration occurred, Simon said:


title: You're So Vain

text: He happened to call at the studio. … I said "We're doing some backup vocals on a song of mine, why don't you come down and sing with us?"


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: Dogtooth (; "Kynodontas") is a 2009 Greek psychological drama film directed by Yorgos Lanthimos. Written by Lanthimos and Efthymis Filippou, the film is about a husband and wife (Christos Stergioglou and Michelle Valley) who keep their children (Angeliki Papoulia, Mary Tsoni and Christos Passalis) ignorant of the world outside their property well into adulthood.


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: "Dogtooth" is Lanthimos's second feature film. It won the Prix Un Certain Regard at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival and was nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the 83rd Academy Awards.


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: A couple, their adult son, and two adult daughters live in a fenced-in compound. The children have no knowledge of the outside world; their parents say they will be ready to leave once they lose a dogtooth, and that one can only leave safely by car. The children entertain themselves with endurance games, such as keeping a finger in hot water. They believe they have a brother on the other side of the fence to whom they throw supplies or stones. The parents reward good behavior with stickers and punish bad behavior with violence.


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: The father pays a security guard at his factory, Christina, to come to the house and have sex with his son. Frustrated by the boy's refusal to give her cunnilingus, Christina trades her headband with the elder daughter in exchange for oral sex from her. The elder daughter persuades the younger daughter to lick her shoulder by bartering the headband. Later, the younger daughter volunteers to lick the elder again. The elder has nothing to offer in exchange, but the younger does not mind and experiments by licking other body parts.


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: The father visits a dog-training facility and demands to have his dog returned. The trainer refuses because the dog has not finished its training, and asks: "Do we want an animal or a friend?"


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: When the children are terrified by a stray cat in the garden, the son kills it with a pair of pruning shears. Deciding to take advantage of the incident, the father shreds his clothes, covers himself in fake blood, and tells his children that their unseen brother was killed by a cat, the most dangerous creature. After he teaches them to bark on all fours to fend off cats, the family holds a memorial service for the brother.


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: Christina again barters for oral sex from the elder daughter. The daughter rejects her offer of hair gel and demands the Hollywood videotapes in her bag. She watches the films in secret and afterward recreates scenes and quotes their dialogue. When the father discovers the tapes, he beats her with one of them, then goes to Christina's flat and hits her with her VCR, cursing her future children to be corrupted by "bad influences".


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: The parents decide that, with Christina no longer available, they will have their son choose one of his sisters as a new sexual partner. After fondling both sisters with his eyes closed, he chooses the elder. She is uncomfortable during their sex and afterward recites threatening dialogue from a Hollywood film to her brother.


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: During a dance performance for the parents' wedding anniversary, the younger daughter stops to rest, but the elder continues, performing the choreography from the film "Flashdance", disturbing her parents. That night, she knocks out one of her dogteeth with a dumbbell and hides in the boot of her father's car. The father discovers her tooth fragments and searches for her fruitlessly. He drives to work the next day; the car sits outside the factory, unattended.


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: "Dogtooth" was the feature film début for Boo Productions, an Athens-based advertising company. The Greek Film Center supported the project with about €200,000 and much of the production was done with help from volunteers. Another €50,000 was offered by the production studio, bringing the overall budget to €250,000. Anna Kalaitzidou and Christos Passalis were stage actors who were cast after having worked with Lanthimos earlier. Mary Tsoni was not a professional actress, but a singer in a punk band. Lanthimos had an open approach to both acting and visual style and felt it would look fake if he involved himself too much in the details. Only when rehearsals started did he begin to develop an idea of the style in which the film should be shot: one where he tried to combine a realistic environment with "really strict framing and a cool, surreal look to go with the narrative".


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: "Dogtooth" premiered on 18 May 2009 at the Cannes Film Festival, and went on to screen at festivals such as Toronto and Maryland. It was released in Greece on 11 November 2009 through Feelgood Entertainment. Verve Pictures picked up the British distribution rights and launched it on 23 April 2010. The American premiere was on 25 June 2010, managed by Kino International.


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: Greek critic Dimitris Danikas gave "Dogtooth" a rating of eight out of ten ("with enthusiasm"), calling it "black, surreal, nightmarish" and writing that "Dogtooth" is as important for Greek cinema as Theodoros Angelopoulos's 1970 film "Reconstitution". Danikas added, "Lanthimos composes and goes from one level to another like a wildcat-creator, constantly and continuously maintaining the same rigorous style. Hence the aphasia; hence the uniformity; hence the submission and the scheduled mass culture; hence also the serial killer; hence, however, the disobedience, the anarchy. As I said at the beginning: "Dogtooth" has the surrealism of Buñuel, the scalpel of Haneke, the underground horror of a thriller without the splatter. Perfect." Danikas characterized "Dogtooth's" Academy Award nomination as "the greatest Greek triumph of recent years." Columnist Dimitris Bouras, writing for "Kathimerini", mentioned "the beneficial effects that the prestigious award could have" and wrote that the nomination reveals three interesting facts: "1) in Greece we need to be extroverts (and not only in cinema), 2) exportable product is whatever has an identity, 3) "Dogtooth"s nomination is like an investment – manna from the heaven of Hollywood for the developing Greek cinema."


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: , the film had a 93% approval rating from critics at Rotten Tomatoes, based on 68 reviews with an average rating of 7.70/10. The site's consensus reads: "It'll be too disturbing – and meandering – for some, but "Dogtooth" is as disturbing and startlingly original as modern filmmaking gets". On Metacritic, the film has a weighted average score of 73 out of 100, based on 17 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: "The Scotsman"s Alistair Harkness hailed Lanthimos as "a bold new voice on the world cinema scene, someone who might soon be elevated to a similar position as those twin pillars of Euro provocation: Lars von Trier and Michael Haneke", but added that the film is "not... designed simply to shock in the way von Trier's work often does... nor does it have that annoyingly prescriptive, punitive air of superiority favoured by Haneke's films."


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: Peter Bradshaw of "The Guardian" praised the filmmakers' technique, finding "Dogtooth" "superbly shot, with some deadpan, elegant compositions, and intentionally skewiff framings". Roger Ebert ("Chicago Sun-Times") gave the film three out of four stars. He noted the director's "complete command of visuals and performances. His cinematography is like a series of family photographs of a family with something wrong with it. His dialogue sounds composed entirely of sentences memorized from tourist phrase books." Mark Olsen of the "Los Angeles Times" wrote, "All of the film's purposeful weirdness is conveyed with an unaffected simplicity that recalls the dead-aim haphazard compositions of photographer William Eggleston." He concluded, "as a film, it's pure and singular, but it's not quite fully formed enough to be what one could call truly visionary."


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: A. O. Scott of "The New York Times" wrote that the film "at times seems as much an exercise in perversity as an examination of it" and "The static wide-screen compositions are beautiful and strange, with the heads and limbs of the characters frequently cropped. The light is gauzy and diffuse, helping to produce an atmosphere that is insistently and not always unpleasantly dreamlike. You might think of paintings by Balthus or maybe Alex Katz, though the implied stories in those pictures are more genuinely evocative and haunting than the actual narrative of "Dogtooth"."


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: Several reviewers, such as Harkness and Bradshaw, made comparisons to the 2008 Fritzl case, although they noted that the screenplay was written before the case emerged. Scott, like Ebert, made references to homeschooling. Resemblances have been noted to the 1972 Mexican film "The Castle of Purity".


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: The film's larger meaning eluded easy expression. Scott called the film "a conversation piece. Though the conversation may... be more along the lines of: 'What was that?' 'I don't know. Weird.' 'Yeah.' [shudder]. 'Weird.'" Olsen saw "Dogtooth"s substance as "part enigma, part allegory and even part sci-fi in its creation of a completely alternate reality." While Ebert found a "message...: God help children whose parents insanely demand unquestioning obedience to their deranged standards... [S]ome have even described the film as a comedy. I wasn't laughing." For Bradshaw, the film investigates "the essential strangeness of something society insists is the benchmark of normality: the family, a walled city state with its own autocratic rule and untellable secrets." Harkness noted the "absolute mockery the situation makes of the perfect family ideal" where "Lanthimos isn't interested in making specific political or social points and he refuses to offer any clarifying backstory"; he found "Dogtooth"s oddness "as organic and playful as its impact is incisor sharp."


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou ended the Cabinet meeting on 25 January 2011 by saying, "The news that the film "Dogtooth" by Yorgos Lanthimos is nominated for Best Foreign Language Film goes far beyond the world of cinema, arts and culture. It concerns the whole country, its people, the new generation of artists who follow the motto 'Yes, we can do it' during difficult times." He continued, "I won't say that the news shows that miracles happen, because the success of Yorgos Lanthimos is based on hard work, talent and his endless potential. Features that characterize the creative forces which lead Greece to a new era; forces which deserve our support and they will have it. Bravo Yorgos."


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: In 1970, Arturo Ripstein made a very similar film, "The Castle of Purity", in which a man keeps his family isolated, the brother and sister have an unusually close connection, and the sister is the one to break the impasse with the outside world. According to Ripstein, his film was based on a case that appeared in newspapers in the 1950s of a man who isolated his family and did not allow them to leave. "There was a lot of talk about the case when I was a little boy." Two works came from that case; a novel by Luis Spota, "La Carcajadas del Gato", and a play by Sergio Galindo, "Los Motivos del Lobos".


title: Dogtooth (film)

text: Actress Dolores del Río was interested in the rights to the play and contacted Luis Buñuel, who declined, but recommended his protege, Ripstein. "Dolores del Río called and said, 'I would like to make an adaptation of the play', and I said, 'I would prefer to go directly to the source and take the case from the newspapers'."


The 1900 United States presidential election was the 29th quadrennial presidential election, held on Tuesday, November 6, 1900. In a re-match of the 1896 race, incumbent Republican President William McKinley defeated his Democratic challenger, William Jennings Bryan. McKinley's victory made him the first president to win a consecutive re-election since Ulysses S. Grant had accomplished the same feat in 1872. Until 1956, this would be the last time in which an incumbent Republican president would win re-election after serving a full term in office. This election saw the fifth rematch in presidential history, something that would not occur again until 1956. This was also the first rematch to produce the same winner both times.


title: 1900 United States presidential election

text: McKinley and Bryan each faced little opposition within their own party. Although some Gold Democrats explored the possibility of a campaign by Admiral George Dewey, Bryan was easily re-nominated at the 1900 Democratic National Convention after Dewey withdrew from the race. McKinley was unanimously re-nominated at the 1900 Republican National Convention. As Vice President Garret Hobart had died in 1899, the Republican convention chose New York Governor Theodore Roosevelt as McKinley's running mate.


text: The return of economic prosperity and recent victory in the Spanish–American War helped McKinley to score a decisive victory, while Bryan's anti-imperialist stance and continued support for bimetallism attracted only limited support. McKinley carried most states outside of the Solid South and won 51.6% of the popular vote. The election results were similar to those of 1896, though McKinley picked up several Western states and Bryan picked up Kentucky.


text: Six months into his second term, McKinley was assassinated in September 1901 and was succeeded by Vice President Roosevelt.


text: The 926 delegates to the Republican convention, which met in Philadelphia on June 19–21, re-nominated President William McKinley by acclamation. Thomas C. Platt, the "boss" of the New York State Republican Party, did not like Theodore Roosevelt, New York's popular governor, even though he was a fellow Republican. Roosevelt's efforts to reform New York politics – including Republican politics – led Platt and other state Republican leaders to pressure President McKinley to accept Roosevelt as his new vice presidential candidate, thus filling the spot left open when Vice President Garret Hobart died in 1899. By electing Roosevelt vice president, Platt would remove Roosevelt from New York state politics. Although Roosevelt was reluctant to accept the nomination for vice president, which he regarded as a relatively trivial and powerless office, his great popularity among most Republican delegates led McKinley to pick him as his new running mate. Quite unexpectedly, Roosevelt would be elevated to the presidency in September 1901, when McKinley was assassinated in Buffalo, New York.


text: After Admiral George Dewey's return from the Spanish–American War, many suggested that he run for president on the Democratic ticket. Dewey, however, had already angered some Protestants by marrying the Catholic Mildred McLean Hazen (the widow of General William Babcock Hazen and daughter of Washington McLean, owner of "The Washington Post") in November 1899 and giving her the house that the nation had given him following the war. His candidacy was also almost immediately plagued by a number of public relations gaffes. Newspapers started attacking him as naïve after he was quoted as saying the job of president would be easy, since the chief executive was merely following orders in executing the laws enacted by Congress, and that he would "execute the laws of Congress as faithfully as I have always executed the orders of my superiors." Shortly thereafter, he admitted never having voted in a presidential election before, mentioning that the only man he ever would have voted for, had he voted, would have been Grover Cleveland. He drew even more criticism when he offhandedly (and prophetically) told a newspaper reporter that, "Our next war will be with Germany."


text: Dewey's campaign was met with a level of pessimism by Gold Democrats on whose support his campaign depended. Some even threw their support to Bryan, since they believed him to be the stronger candidate. As early as three days into his candidacy, his campaign having been damaged by the aforementioned missteps, rumors abounded regarding Dewey's impending withdrawal which proved false. Further injuries, however, were made when it became clear that the Democratic Party leaders of Vermont were hostile to Dewey and wholly committed to Bryan. Ohio similarly went for Bryan, though with the caveat there that some leaders suggested that all mention to silver in the party platform be dropped. By May 5, John Roll McLean, the brother-in-law of and effective campaign manager for Dewey, defected from the campaign and was widely considered to now be silently supporting Bryan. By May 17, Dewey recognized that there was very little chance for him to gather enough delegates among the Western and Southern states to possibly keep Bryan from attaining two-thirds of the delegates at the convention, publicly commenting that he no longer even knew why he had decided to run for president at all; He effectively withdrew around this time. After this there was a major boom for his nomination as vice president on the ticket alongside Bryan; however Dewey resolutely refused to be considered.


text: William Jennings Bryan was faced with little real opposition after Dewey withdrew from the race. Bryan won at the 1900 Democratic National Convention held at Kansas City, Missouri, on July 4–6, garnering 936 delegate votes for the nomination.