Problem: Background: Andrew Gary Johns (born 19 May 1974) is an Australian former professional rugby league footballer of the 1990s and 2000s. He is considered by many to be one of the greatest players of all time. Hailed as the best halfback in the world for many years, he captained the Newcastle Knights in the National Rugby League and participated in the team's only two premiership victories in 1997 and 2001, playing a club record 249 games for the Knights. Johns also represented his country at two World Cups, and on one Kangaroo tour, playing in total 21 Test matches for the national side.
Context: On 26 August 2007 Johns was arrested for fare evasion on the London Underground, and subsequently found to be in possession of one ecstasy tablet. He was cautioned and released with no further charges. Johns initially claimed that an unknown person had pushed the tablet into his pocket which he later forgot to remove before leaving the crowded venue. This initial statement was met with a great deal of cynicism from both the press and the public. On 30 August, Johns revealed, live on the Footy Show, that he had regularly taken ecstasy throughout his playing career, mainly during the off-season. He claimed he had suffered from depression and bipolar disorder and the drugs helped him in dealing with the high level of psychological 'pressure' associated with his career as an elite sportsman. Not long after the incident he released his 'tell-all' autobiography that went into further details regarding his depression and drug use while playing in the NRL. The ARU released a press statement shortly after the controversy arose, stating that Johns' drug use was known to the ARU and was a key factor in its decision to not proceed with contractual negotiations in 2004. Brett Robinson, then high-performance unit manager, said that, as well as Johns' age and injury history, the knowledge of his drug taking had been influential in the ARU making its final decision. When Johns was named the Best Player of the Last 30 Years in early 2008, the accolade allayed concern that Johns' shock drug admission the year before had tarnished his remarkable efforts on the field for Newcastle, NSW and Australia. On receiving the award he was quoted as saying his health was now in great shape. "I'm at the best place I have been in a long time," he said. "It's not until you step away that I realise all the pressure I was under, I'm not going to miss playing at all."
Question: Did John ever possess ecstasy?
Answer: subsequently found to be in possession of one ecstasy tablet.

Problem: Background: Archduke Charles of Austria, Duke of Teschen (German: Erzherzog Carl Ludwig Johann Joseph Laurentius von Osterreich, Herzog von Teschen; 5 September 1771 - 30 April 1847) was an Austrian field-marshal, the third son of Emperor Leopold II and his wife, Maria Luisa of Spain. He was also the younger brother of Francis II, Holy Roman Emperor. Despite being epileptic, Charles achieved respect both as a commander and as a reformer of the Austrian army.
Context: The caution which the archduke preached so earnestly in his strategic works, he displayed in practice only when the situation seemed to demand it, though his education certainly prejudiced him in favor of the defensive at all costs. He was at the same time capable of forming and executing the most daring offensive strategy, and his tactical skill in the handling of troops, whether in wide turning movements, as at Wurzburg and Zurich, or in masses, as at Aspern and Wagram, was certainly equal to that of any leader of his time, with only a few exceptions. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica Eleventh Edition, his campaign of 1796 is considered almost faultless. That he sustained defeat in 1809 was due in part to the great numerical superiority of the French and their allies, and in part to the condition of his newly reorganized troops. His six weeks' inaction after the victory of Aspern is, however, open to unfavorable criticism. As a military writer, his position in the evolution of the art of war is very important, and his doctrines had naturally the greatest weight. Nevertheless, they cannot but be considered antiquated even in 1806. Caution and the importance of strategic points are the chief features of his system. The rigidity of his geographical strategy may be gathered from the prescription that "this principle is never to be departed from." Again and again he repeated the advice that nothing should be hazarded unless one's army is completely secure, a rule which he himself neglected with such brilliant results in 1796. Strategic points, he says, not the defeat of the enemy's army, decide the fate of one's own country, and must constantly remain the general's main concern, a maxim which was never more remarkably disproved than in the war of 1809. The editor of the archduke's work is able to make but a feeble defense against Clausewitz's reproach that Charles attached more value to ground than to the annihilation of the foe. In his tactical writings the same spirit is conspicuous. His reserve in battle is designed to "cover a retreat." The baneful influence of these antiquated principles was clearly shown in the maintenance of Koniggratz-Josefstadt in 1866 as a strategic point, which was preferred to the defeat of the separated Prussian armies, and in the strange plans produced in Vienna for the campaign of 1859, and in the almost unintelligible Battle of Montebello in the same year. The theory and the practice of Archduke Charles form one of the most curious contrasts in military history. In the one he is unreal, in the other he displayed, along with the greatest skill, a vivid activity which made him for long the most formidable opponent of Napoleon. He was the 831st Knight of the Order of the Golden Fleece in Austria.
Question: How did he achieve this position?
Answer:
along with the greatest skill, a vivid activity which made him for long the most formidable opponent of Napoleon.