text:
the national interest June 19, 2019
Trump Awards Kook Art Laffer for Inventing Fake Curve
Arthur Laffer, Republican economist and Medal of Freedom winner. Photo: AP/Shutterstock
Last year, famed Republican economist Art Laffer co-authored a hagiographic tribute to President Trump and his agenda. Trump habitually bestows his most slavish supporters with pardons or — in the event they have not been convicted of any federal crimes — awards. Laffer accordingly will receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom today.
But Laffer's place of honor within his party was settled long ago. In 1974, he and Jude Wanniski, then a Wall Street Journal editorial writer, began proselytizing among Republicans for a new theory the two had worked out together. The breakthrough moment, at least according to legend, came when Laffer scrawled a curve on a cocktail napkin for Dick Cheney. The Laffer curve, as it came to be known, showed that the tax rate at the bottom, zero percent, and the top, 100 percent, both yielded identical revenue of zero. The curve connecting these numbers indicated that a lower tax rate could produce higher revenue.
Laffer's more gentle critics, while noting that his curve fails to describe existing reality, have conceded that his curve is correct in the abstract. "There's no question there's a Laffer curve," says Republican economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin. "There's always a question as to where you are on it."
Even this limited defense of Laffer is provably untrue. Of course a zero percent tax rate yields zero revenue, but a 100 percent tax rate definitely does not yield zero revenue. Many governments have imposed 100 percent tax rates and have still managed to collect a great deal of revenue. (Ask yourself how the Soviet Union managed to control a vast empire for the better part of a century.) The conservative economist Casey Mulligan has found several examples of democratic states where some people, especially pensioners, faced marginal tax rates at or above 100 percent, and their labor did not disappear. I would personally prefer not to pay a 100 percent income tax, but under such circumstances, I would not cease working. Many other people would make the same choice.
This is not merely a technical objection. It exposes a conceptual flaw underlying Laffer's entire premise. People are not, in fact, utility-maximizing robots. They choose to work for reasons other than maximizing their incomes on the margin: habit, pride of craft, and so on. Most taxes probably produce the highest revenue at rates below 100 percent, but the curve does not resemble Laffer's, and it does not hit zero.
In the real world, Laffer's contributions have built a streak of unbroken wrongness over a time and scale few policy entrepreneurs in history can match. Laffer predicted Ronald Reagan's tax cuts would pay for themselves. When they instead produced historic deficits, Laffer continued to claim he was right. He predicted Bill Clinton's attempt to reduce the deficit by raising taxes on the rich would backfire ("I think the plan will fail. It entails price controls, which have never worked. It calls for tax increases, and that's exactly the wrong way to go. It makes no sense to raise taxes on people who work and pay more to those who don't work. This is the Reagan revolution in reverse"). Instead, revenue growth exceeded projections.
He likewise predicted President Obama's plan would "destroy the economy" (it did not) and that President Trump's tax cut would "pay for itself many times over" (it did not pay for itself at all), among many other failed predictions. Not content to botch his analysis of the federal budget, he has parachuted into several state governments and prodded Republicans into adopting his utterly false worldview. In Kansas and Louisiana, Republican governors listened to Laffer and produced fiscal catastrophe so comprehensive and undeniable Republicans in their state revolted.
Economists do not take Laffer's claims seriously. This has not reduced his influence whatsoever. Laffer has elevated his curve to metaphysical status within the party, which treats the skepticism of economists as more evidence of their own correctness. "Economists still ridicule the Laffer Curve," boasted Wall Street Journal editorial page editor Robert Bartley, "but policymakers pay it careful heed."
A dozen years ago, I wrote a book attempting to explain the mystery of how Laffer's kook theory took hold of a major political party and could not be dislodged even after multiple high-profile failures.
The failures have not stopped since then, but the intervening era has made the mystery a whole lot less mysterious. The list of policies in which Republicans cling to a position dismissed by academics and experts has continued to grow.
The rise of Donald Trump has shown that even those of us who had the harshest view of the Republican Party's capacity to weigh evidence had nonetheless given it far too much credit. Of course a party that has fallen in line behind Donald Trump would elevate a crank like Art Laffer to the status of economic savant. How could it not?
Get the latest from Jonathan Chait in your inbox.
Analysis and commentary on the latest political news from New York columnist Jonathan Chait.
trump tax cuts


Our sales team is ready to assist you with all of your home building projects. From flooring options and countertops to window treatments and builder options we have the sales and design staff as well as the showroom space to accommodate your home building projects. Please contact us to discover the J.R. McDade Company quality of service.


text:
OBSERVATORY SUBMITS PAPER ON DEMANDS OF FREEDOM OF RELIGION TO EU
"RELIGARE" is a three-year European research project on religions, belonging, beliefs and secularism in Europe,funded by the European Commission. Its stated purpose is to explore adequate policy responses to religious and cultural diversity as a social reality in Europe. It focusses on the areas public space, the workplace, the family, and state support to faith communities.
An atheist organization submitted a lengthy paper containing many worrying details for those who seek to protect freedom of religion. The Observatory on Intolerance and Discrimination Against Christians did not want to leave these arguments unanswered.
Together, with renowned experts, we compiled a submission which has become more than a mere answer: it maps out the way to a Europe that is conscious of its heritage and has respect for fundamental rights, without disregarding today's plurality of religion and belief. Please find below the summaries of its main parts. Download and read the entire submission here.
Religious Freedom as a Human Right
Freedom of Religion is recognized in all major human rights documents. Its most detailed definition of found in a document of the Roman Catholic Church, Dignitatis Humanae. It is the right to adhere, or not to adhere, to a religious belief, the right to be free from coercion in religious matters, and the right to manifest religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.
The right to religious freedom is not only an individual right, but also applies, as a collective right, to religious communities. For them, it comprises inter alia the right to govern themselves according to their own norms, the right to public worship, the right to instruct their members in the practice of the religious life, the right to select, educate, appoint, and transfer their own ministers, the right to erect buildings for religious purposes, and to acquire and use suitable funds or properties, the right to public teaching and witness to their faith, whether by the spoken or by the written word, and the right to hold meetings and to establish educational, cultural, charitable and social organizations, under the impulse of their own religious sense.
Religion and the Common Good
Religion, and most of all the Christian faith, is a valuable asset for society: Religious people have a healthier lifestyle and higher life expectancies; are less likely to suffer from depression, have more stable marriages, are less likely to engage in criminal activity, and are more generous in contributing to the common good. Therefore religion should be fostered and encouraged, not restricted or oppressed. Given that those advantages apply in particular to Christians, it follows that, in the eyes of any reasonable and well-intentioned politician, practising Christians must be the most desirable of citizens.
It is regrettable to observe the term 'fundamentalism' being used as an instrument of demagoguery by certain 'secularist' movements. The term 'fundamentalism' has its origin within the Protestant community of the United States in the early 20th century, describing a specific package of irreducible theological beliefs (the 'fundamentals'). Today, the term fundamentalism describes a blind and uncritical observance and a disregard of facts in favour of one's faith or ideology.
The reproach of 'fundamentalism' does not hold true with regard to mainstream Christianity.. On the contrary, a characteristic trait of Christianity is the openness to adapt philosophical and theological positions to scientific findings.. Many of the most important scientific discoveries were made by Christians.
Secular 'Humanism' – or Militant Atheism?
It should be noted that the EHF submission is full of rather unsubstantiated negative stereotypes, through which religion is identified as the single source of all social evils: religion is portrayed as "totalitarian" (p.3), and Christianity accused of "dividing rather than uniting" society (p.4) and producing "alienation". Strangely enough, no mention is made of the fact that the great totalitarian ideologies of the 20th century, Communism and Fascism, were decidedly anti-Christian.
The secular 'humanism' underpinning the EHF submission appears to have the sole purpose of attacking other worldviews and lifestances. Such an ideology, which defines it self ex negativo (i.e. solely through its opposition to other people's beliefs and values) is not likely to make any significant contribution to the common good. Whereas religious communities entertain a great number of hospitals, dispensaries, residences for elderly people, nursery schools, schools, universities, all of which are open to the general public, one never sees a similar commitment to the public good on the side of atheist groups.
Dialogue with Non-Believers
The EHF paper argues that atheist and humanist organisations should be granted similar consideration or official standing in a regular and transparent dialogue as is foreseen for churches by Article 17 of the TFEU.
Such requests, which aim at giving disproportionate consideration and influence to a marginal social group, are manifestly ill-founded, because:
- Someone who professes to have no religion or belief cannot claim a right to manifest his irreligion or non-belief "in worship, teaching, practice and observance". What worship, practice or observance would that be?
- It is unclear who the European Humanist Federation actually represents. The actual membership of the federation seems to be negligible. It is wrong to claim that any person who does not frequent a Church every Sunday is not a Christian, or to assert that any person not holding a baptism certificate (or similar) must be considered to share the militantly anti-religious views of EHF.
- One should be mindful of the risks and dangers associated with granting any consideration or official standing to organisations that must be expected to promote an agenda that is not conducive, but radically opposed, to human rights. The historic experience with atheist totalitarian regimes provides ample proof for the radical antagonism between militant atheism and human rights. There is no reason why the ideology of irreligion should be given a second chance.
The Meaning of 'Secularism'
The EHF calls secularism "the principle that, in a plural, open society where people follow many different religious and non-religious ways of life, the communal institutions that we share (and together pay for) should provide a neutral public space where we can all meet on equal terms." However, what in this definition is called a 'neutral' public space would in reality be a public space from which all religious symbols, views, opinions, or other elements, must be removed. In actual fact, therefore, such a 'neutral' public space would not be neutral at all: it would accommodate the ideology of atheism and exclude all others.
The EHF claims that "The European Court of Human Rights… considers the principle of secularism as one of the founding principles of the rule of law and the best guarantee for democracy and the respect of human rights." This statement is wrong. The ECtHR never made such a statement. What it did say was something different: that a country where the constitution gives particular importance to the principle of 'secularism' has the right of defending this constitutional value by prohibiting and dissolving a political party that wants to introduce a legal order based on the principle of theocracy. But this argument could equally operate in the inverse direction: If a country in its constitutional law foresees a state religion or an established church, it may prohibit as 'unconstitutional' all political activities that seek to overturn that situation.
Christianity recognises the secular character of the State, but interprets it differently. The term "secular" is derived from the Latin word saeculum, which designates not necessarily a determined amount of time (one century), but is also used to designate the life span of a person. 'Secular' is thus everything that is of limited duration, such as the earthly life of each human being, or that has to do with (merely) earthly or temporal matters. For Christians, there is thus no difficulty in recognising the 'secular' character of the State. The task of politicians and public administrations is to ensure the temporal well-being of citizens, whereas it is the task of the Church to ensure their eternal salvation. Both tasks should be separate from each other. But it does not mean that the State should be irreligious or anti-religious, or that the public sphere should be cleansed from all traces of religiosity, nor can it justify the exclusion of religious views and opinions from public debate.
Concept of "Neutrality" or "Secularism" is not Binding
There is thus one fundamental assumption in this debate, which is found not only in the EHF submission to the RELIGARE project, but already in the project's own terms of reference, and which needs to be challenged: it is the notion that there is an obligation for States to be "neutral" with regard to religious or secular world-views.
There are many States in Europe, and even within the EU, that have not signed up to "neutrality" or "secularism" which becomes evident by looking at their constitutions. References to God are made and / or a special status is granted to religion in the constitutions of Germany, Switzerland, Ireland, Greece, Italy, Liechtenstein, Malta, Monaco, Denmark, England, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Andorra, Poland, and Spain.
The UDHR, the ECHR, or the EUFRC do not demand the equal treatment of all religions and worldviews. Freedom of religion and conscience is not equal treatment of all religions. Instead, it demands, as a minimum, tolerance and accommodation for all religious beliefs unless they are found to stand at variance with fundamental requirements of justice.
EHF argues that the presence of religious symbols in the public space violates a principle of 'neutrality' or 'secularism'. This point of view is manifestly ill-founded, given that such principles are inexistent in EU and international law. The mere existence or presence of religious symbols or religious language can, moreover, never be considered a violation of a person's freedom of religion or conscience.
Restrictions with regard to religious clothing severely restrict the personal liberty of citizens, and must thus be duly justified. In a free society, everybody should be free to wear what he or she wants except for reasons of safety, decency, or where the wearing of a uniform is reasonably required.
With regard to education of children, the State's role is ancillary to that of the parents. The State has therefore no right to indoctrinate children with the ideologies that may, at a given time, prevail among the political elites. It follows that the role of publicly funded schools is to support the parents in giving to their children the education they want to give them. If parents want to educate their children in the Christian faith, the state – even if it defines itself as "secular" or "neutral" - must support them in this effort. This could be done by adequately supporting confessional schools and / or by establishing the possibility for religion lessons in state-owned schools, if there is sufficient demand for it.
Current EU legislation to prohibit discrimination in employment recognises the need for exceptions for organisations with a specific ethos. Similar respect ought to be paid to the ethos based on religion or belief of individual employers. To reduce limitations on contractual freedom, it should be reminded that the principle of 'neutrality', and hence the obligation to provide equal treatment irrespective of religion, applies to the State more strictly than it does to private employers.
With regard to conscientious objection, it should be noted that EHF's call for 'regulation' is in fact a call for restriction of this fundamental right.
EHF's suggests that "human rights, including rights to conscientious objection, apply only to individuals and not to institutions" and that, for this reason, Christian hospitals, or even Christian Churches, are not entitled to them. It is, however, nowhere said in international law that human rights can only be exercised individually. On the contrary, with regard to certain human rights, their collective nature is explicitly recognised or implied in the nature of the right (e.g. the right to free assembly, or the right to maintain a given cultural identity, or religious freedom, which is to be exercised "either alone or in community with others").
Contrary to EHF's claim, 'conscientious objection' cannot be restricted to 'religious liberty' issues: Moral objections are generally based on solid and objective reasons, and the objector may even be an atheist.
It is perfectly legitimate and reasonable to understand "marriage" to be a life-long alliance of one man and one woman with the purpose of rearing children, or to define "family" on the basis of marriage and descent This concept of family has existed long before the advent of Christianity, and it is not the tenet of one particular religion.
EHF, by contrast, seeks to promote a novel concept of "marriage" and "family" that discards the natural complementarity of the two sexes as irrelevant. Rather than on any natural order, this novel concept is based on arbitrary "choices". If consequently followed, it would turn into a "family" any group of two or more persons that chooses to call itself by that name.
However, words become meaningless if their meaning is expanded beyond reasonable limits. The all-inclusive novel concept of "family" would only result in dissolving the concept. As a consequence, it would become impossible to devise policies that provide targeted support to those families that correspond to the natural order of things.
EHF argues that "there is no evidence that [homosexual] marriages cannot provide a successful environment for bringing up children". But, considering that the protection of a children does not allow experiments in vivo, and with regard to the fact that under the natural order the begetting of children requires both a male and a female parent, the burden of proof is on those who argue in favour of bringing a child up same-sex marriages, not on those who are sceptical.
In most European countries religious organisations are for the greatest part financed by the voluntary contributions of their believers. However, through these contributions, religious believers provide not only a direct support to their own religious community, but also an indirect support to the common good.
If and where financial support is given by governments, it is justified by the following reasons:
the public interest to maintain and cultivate the country's cultural heritage and identity;
the support for specific initiatives that contribute to common good (such as schools, hospitals, etc.). Such support usually only complements the funding provided by the faith-based group itself, and would in the same way be provided to any organisation making a similar contribution.
a third reason is the compensation, usually contractually agreed upon, for property that was – often under rather questionable pretexts – seized from the religious communities in question in the course of history.
It is therefore obvious that calls for the reduction of current state funding of churches and religious bodies have hardly any justification. What certainly has no foundation at all is the suggestion that other religious communities that have only be recently established, or indeed 'humanist' groups such as the EHF, should be entitled to the same funding.
A Warning To America
Do you know why America is in a better state than Europe? Because you enjoy more freedom than Europeans. And do you know why Americans enjoy more freedom than Europeans? Because you are still allowed to tell the truth. In Europe and Canada people are dragged to court for telling the truth about islam.
I, too, have been dragged to court. I am an elected member of the house of representatives in the Netherlands. I am currently standing in court like a common criminal for saying that islam is a dangerous totalitarian ideology rather than a religion. The court case is still pending, but I risk a jail sentence of 16 months.
Last week, my friend Lars Hedegaard, a journalist from Denmark, was fined because in a private conservation, which was recorded without his knowing, he had criticised the way women are treated in islamic societies.
Recently, another friend, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, a human rights activist from Austria, was fined because she had criticised islam's founder Muhammad. She had said that Muhammad was a pedophile because he had married a 6-year old girl and raped her when she was 9.
Unfortunately, there are many similar cases.
I am especially happy to be in your midst because here I can say what I want to say without having to fear that I will be dragged to court upon leaving this church.
My dear American friends, you cannot imagine how we envy your First Amendment. The day when America follows the example of Europe and Canada and introduces so-called "hate speech crimes" which is only used to punish people who are critical of islam, that day America will have lost its freedom.
My friends, let us hope that this never happens.
Last week, we celebrated Liberation Day in the Netherlands. We celebrated the liberation from the Nazi occupation in 1945. Many American soldiers, including many young Tennesseans, played a decisive role in the liberation of the Netherlands from nazi tyranny. We are immensely grateful for that. Young Americans gave their lives so that the Dutch might be free. I assure you: The Dutch people will never forget this.
Unfortunately, however, the Europe which your fathers and grandfathers fought and died for is not the Europe we are living in today.
I travel the world to tell people what Europe has become. I wish I could take you all on a visit to my country and show you what Europe has become. It has changed beyond recognition as a result of mass immigration. And not just any mass immigration, but mass immigration driven by the dangerous force of islam.
My friends, I am sorry. I am here today with an unpleasant message. I am here with a warning. I am here with a battle cry: "Wake up, Christians of Tennessee. Islam is at your gate." Do not make the mistake which Europe made. Do not allow islam to gain a foothold here.
Islam is dangerous. Islam wants to establish a state on earth, ruled by islamic sharia law. Islam aims for the submission, whether by persuasion, intimidation or violence, of all non-Muslims, including Christians.
The results can be seen in Europe.
Islam is an ideology of conquest. It uses two methods to achieve this goal: the first method is the sword. Do you know what figures on the flag of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a country where Christian churches are banned and Christians are not even allowed to wear a tiny crucifix? There is a huge sword on that flag, just below the Islamic creed. The message is clear. Without the sword islam would not have been able to spread its creed.
The second method is immigration. Islam's founder Muhammad himself taught his followers how to conquer through immigration when they moved from Mecca to Medina. This phenomenon of conquest through immigration is called al-Hijra. My learned friend Sam Solomon has written a perfect book about it.
I had a copy of Sam's book sent to all the members of the Dutch Parliament. But most of them are worse than Saint-Thomas in the Bible. Thomas did not believe what he had not seen. Most politicians refuse to believe the things they see before their very eyes.
In Europe we have been experiencing al-Hijra for over 30 years now. Many of our cities have changed beyond recognition. "In each one of our cities" wrote the well-known Italian author Oriana Fallaci shortly before her death in 2006, "there is a second city, a state within the state, a government within the government. A Muslim city, a city ruled by the Koran." – end of quote.
How did the Europeans get into this situation? It is partly our own fault because we have foolishly adopted the concept of cultural relativism, which manifests itself in the ideology of multiculturalism.
Cultural relativism advocates that all cultures are equal. However, cultures wither away and die if people no longer believe that its values are better than those of another culture.
Islam is spreading like wildfire wherever people lack the guts to say that their values are better than the Islamic values.
Islam is spreading like wildfire because the Koran explicitly tells Muslims that they are "the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind" and that non-Muslims are "the worst of creatures."
Islam is spreading like wildfire everywhere in the West where political, academic, cultural and media elites lack the guts to proudly proclaim, as I believe we all should proclaim:
Our Judeo-Christian Western culture is far better and far superior to the islamic culture. We must be proud to say so!
Multiculturalism is a disaster. Almost everyone acknowledges this today, but few dare say why. Let me tell you why: Multiculturalism made us tolerate the intolerant, and now intolerance is annihilating tolerance.
We should, in the name of tolerance, claim the right not to tolerate the intolerant. Let us no longer be afraid and politically correct, let us be brave and bold. Let us tell the truth about islam.
Before I continue I want to make clear that I do not have a problem with people. I always make a distinction between the people and the ideology, between Muslims and islam.
Indeed, I have no problems with Muslims, but I do have a problem with the totalitarian Islamic ideology of hate and violence. The fact that there are many so-called moderate Muslims, does not imply that there exists a moderate islam. A moderate islam doen not exist and will never exist.
And because there is no such thing as a moderate islam, the islamization of our free Western societies is an enormous danger.
Only two weeks ago, the British press revealed how the so-called "London Taliban" is threatening to kill women who do not wear veils in the London borough of Tower Hamlets.
In some neighbourhoods Islamic regulations are already being enforced, also on non-Muslims. Women's rights are being trampled. We are confronted with headscarves and burqa's, polygamy, female genital mutilation, honor-killings where men murder their wives, daughters or sisters because they do not behave in accordance with Islamic rules.
Polls show that the influence of those Muslims who live according to islam's aggressive requirements is growing, especially among young people.
Among 15-year-old German Muslims, 40 percent consider islam more important than democracy.
Among Muslim university students in Britain, 40 percent support sharia. One in three of those students considers it legitimate to kill in the name of islam.
Christians are asked to follow the example of Jesus. Muslims are ordered to follow the example of Muhammad. That is why islam is dangerous. While Christianity preaches love, islam preached hatred and practizes violence. Hatred and violence for everyone who is not a Muslim.
Muhammad personally participated in the ethnic cleansing of Medina, where half the population once was Jewish. Muhammad helped to chop off their heads. On his deathbed, he ordered his followers to cleanse Arabia of all Jews and Christians.
To this very day, Christian symbols are prohibited in Saudi-Arabia. If you wear a cross in Saudi Arabia, they sent you to jail.
And now, Europe is beginning to look like Arabia.
Just today, a poll revealed that in Brussels, the capital of the European Union, half the islamic youths are anti-semitic. It is dangerous for Jews to walk the streets in Brussels.
If you wear a cross or a kippah in certain urban areas in Europe today, you risk being beaten up. In the capital of my own country, Amsterdam, a tram driver was forced to remove his crucifix from sight, while his Muslim colleagues are allowed to wear the veil.
In June 2008, the Christian church authorities in the Danish town of Arhus decided to pay so-called "protection money" to islamic so-called "security guards" who assure that church goers are not harassed by islamic youths.
On March 31st, 2010, Muslims entered the Roman Catholic cathedral of Cordoba, Spain, and attacked the guards with knives. They claimed the cathedral was theirs.
Last month, the bishops of Sweden sent out a letter to priests advising them to avoid converting asylum seekers from islamic countries to Christianity, because the converts would risk losing their lives.
In the Netherlands, the city authorities in Amsterdam register polygamous marriages. The authorities in Rotterdam serve only halal meals in municipal cafeterias. Theaters provide separate seats for women who are not allowed to sit next to men. Municipal swimming pools have separate swimming hours for men and women, Muslim lawyers do not have to stand when the judges enter court rooms.
Meanwhile Jews are no longer safe on our streets. In Amsterdam, the city of Anne Frank, Jews are again being harassed in the streets. Even political leaders acknowledged that life has become unsafe for Jews in Holland. Do you know what they said? They advised Jews to emigrate. Jews are already running for Israel. But I say: Jews must not leave, violent Muslims must leave!
What is needed, my friends, is a spirit of resistance.
I repeat: What we need is a spirit of resistance.
Why? Because resistance to evil is our moral duty. This resistance begins with expressing our solidarity to Christians, Jews, indeed, to all people worldwide, who are the victims of islam. There are millions of them.
We can see what islam has in store for us if we watch the fate of the Christians in the islamic world, such as the Copts in Egypt, the Maronites in Lebanon, the Assyrians in Iraq, and Christians elsewhere.
Almost every day, churches are arsoned and Christians are assassinated in islamic countries.
In a report on the persecution of Christians in the world, Archbishop Twal of Jerusalem, wrote recently– I quote: "In the Middle East to be Christian means accepting that you must make a great sacrifice. All too often and in many places, Christians suffer various threats. On some occasions, their homes and churches are burnt, and people are killed. How many atrocities must we endure before somebody somewhere comes to our aid?" – end of quote.
Indeed, how many atrocities before we come to their aid?
Rivers of tears are flowing from the Middle East, where there is only one safe haven for Christians. You know where that is. The only place in the Middle East where Christians are safe is Israel.
That is why Israel deserves our support. Israel is a safe haven for everyone, whatever their belief and opinions. Israel is a beacon of light in a region of total darkness. Israel is fighting our fight.
The jihad against Israel is a jihad against all of us. If Israel falls, we, too, will feel the consequences. If Jerusalem falls, Athens, Rome, Amsterdam and Nashville will fall. Therefore, we all are Israel. We should always support Israel!
Today, we are confronted with political unrest in the Arab countries. The Arab peoples long for freedom. However, the ideology and culture of islam is so deeply entrenched in these countries that real freedom is simply impossible as long as islam remains dominant.
A recent poll in post-revolution Egypt found that 85 percent of Egyptians are convinced that islam's influence on politics is good, 82 percent believe that adulterers should be stoned, 84 percent want the death penalty for apostates. The press refers to the events in the Arab world today as the Arab spring. I call it the Arab winter.
Islam and freedom, islam and democracy are not compatible.
The death of Osama bin Laden last week was a victory for the free world, but we will be confronted with Islamic terrorism as long as islam exists, because islam's founder Muhammad himself was a terrorist, worse than Bin Laden.
And here is another truth: The rise of islam means the rise of sharia law in our judicial systems. In Europe we already have sharia wills, sharia schools, sharia banks. Britain even has sharia courts.
In my own country, the Netherlands, sharia is being applied by the courts in cases relating to divorce, child custody, inheritance, and property ownership. Women are always the victims of this because sharia discriminates women.
This is a disgrace. This is not the way we should treat women.
My friends, I told you that we have just remembered Liberation Day to commemorate the young Americans and all the heroes who offered their lives to free the Netherlands from nazi tyranny. It would be an insult to them if we Europeans would give up that precious freedom for another totalitarian ideology called Islam.
That is the goal for which my party and I work day after day. And we are having success.
In the Netherlands, we are successfully starting to roll back islam. The current Dutch government is a minority government which can only survive with the backing of my party, the Party for Freedom.
We have 24 seats of the 150 seats in parliament and we support the government, in return for measures to prohibit certain aspects of sharia law.
We have achieved that the Netherlands will soon ban the burka and the niqaab.
We will also restrict immigration from non-Western countries by up to 50% in the next four years. We are not going to allow islam to steal our country from us. It was the land of our fathers, it is our land now, our values are based on Christianity, Judaism and Humanism and we will pass this on to our children with all the freedoms that the previous generations have fought for.
Let those who want to rob us from our freedoms, stay in their own countries. We do not need them. If you want to wear a burqa, stay in Saudi-Arabia. If you want four wives, stay in Iran. If you want to live in a country where the islamic ideology is dominant, stay in Pakistan, if you don't want to assimilate in our society, stay in Somalia. But don't come over here.
We are also going to strip criminals who have a double nationality – for instance Dutch and Moroccan, and who repeatedly commit serious crimes, of their Dutch nationality. We will send them packing, back to their homeland.
My friends, what the Party for Freedom has achieved, shows that it can be done. We can fight the islamization of our societies.
Dear friends, here is my warning. Make no mistake: Islam is also coming for America. In fact, it is already here. America is facing a stealth jihad, the islamic attempt to introduce sharia law bit by bit. Last March, a judge in Tampa, Florida, ruled that a lawsuit against a mosque and involving the control of 2.4 million dollars, should proceed under Islamic law.
My friends, be aware that this is only the beginning. This is also how it started in Europe. If things continue like this, you will soon have the same problems as we are currently facing.
Leaders who talk about immigration without mentioning islam are blind. They ignore the most important problem Europe and America are facing. I have a message for them: it's islam stupid!
My friends, fortunately, not all politicians are irresponsible. Here, in Tennessee, brave politicians want to pass legislation which gives the state the power to declare organisations as terrorist groups and allowing material supporters of terrorism to be prosecuted. I applaud them for that. They are true heroes.
Yesterday and today, I met some of those brave legislators. They told me that Tennessee in particular is a target of islam. Help them win their battle.
They need your support.
While Tennessee is in the frontline, similar legislative initiatives are also being taken in the states of Oklahoma, Wyoming, South Carolina, Texas, Florida, Missouri, Arizona, Indiana. It is encouraging to see that so many politicians are willing to resist islam.
This gives us hope and courage. I am not a pessimist. We can still turn the tide – even in Europe – if we act today.
There are five things which we must do.
First, we must defend freedom of speech.
Freedom is the source of human creativity and development. People and nations wither away without the freedom to question what is presented to them as the truth.
Without freedom of speech we risk becoming slaves. Frederick Douglass, the 19th century black American politician, the son of a slave, said – I quote – "To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker."
I have already told you about my court case. This legal charade will not, however, prevent me from saying the truth. Never. I will speak out, even if they drag me before 500 courts and threaten to jail me for a thousand years.
The fact that we are being treated as criminals for telling the truth must not deter us. We are doomed if we remain silent or let ourselves be silenced. Let us not forget, this is our first and most important obligation: defend the right to speak the truth.
Second, we must end cultural relativism and political correctness. We must repeat it over and over again, especially to our children: Our Western culture based on Christianity and Judaism is superior to the islamic culture. Our laws are superior to sharia. Our judeo-christian values are better than islam's totalitarian rules.
And because they are superior and better, we must defend them. We must fight for our own identity, or else we will lose it. We need to be warriors for the good, because the good is worth fighting for. Neutrality in the face of evil is evil.
Third, we must stop the islamization of our countries. More islam means less freedom. There is enough islam in the West already. We must stop immigration from non-Western countries, which are mostly islamic countries. We must expel criminal immigrants. We must forbid the construction of new hate palaces called mosques.
We must also close down all islamic schools because educating children in a spirit of hate is one of the worst things imaginable. We must introduce anti-sharia legislation everywhere in the free world. Enough is enough.
Fourth, we must take pride in our nations again. We must cherish and preserve the culture and identity of our country. Preserving our own culture and identity is the best antidote against islamization.
And fifth, last but certainly not least, we must elect wise and courageous leaders who are brave enough to address the problems which are facing us, including the threat of islam.
Politicians who have the courage to speak the truth about islam.
Politicians who dare to denounce the devastating results of the multicultural society.
Politicians who – without political correctness – say: enough is enough.
You and I, Americans and Europeans, we belong to a common Western culture. We share the ideas and ideals of our common Judeo-Christian heritage. In order to pass this heritage on to our children and grandchildren, we must stand together, side by side, in our struggle against Islamic barbarism.
That, my friends, is why I am here. I am here to forge an alliance. Our international freedom alliance. We must stand together for the Judeo-Christian West.
We will not allow islam to overrun Israel and Europe, the cradle of the judeo-Christian civilization.
My friends, we will stand together.
We will stand firm.
We will not submit. Never. Not in Israel, not in Europe, not in America. Nowhere.
We will survive.
We will stop islam.
We will defend our freedoms.
We will remain free.
This is the text of a speech by Geert Wilders in the Cornerstone Church in Nashville, 12 May 2011
Labels: Islam
European Court Tells U.K. Government to Clarify Rights of Christians
Click on title for article. We wait to see if anything good can come out of Strasbourg.
Labels: Europe, law, liberty
OBSERVATORY SUBMITS PAPER ON DEMANDS OF FREEDOM OF...
European Court Tells U.K. Government to Clarify Ri...

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Leopold Stokowski (1882-1977) was born in St. Marylebone, London, of Polish/Irish parentage. He received his musical education at the Royal College of Music and Oxford University. His first professional appointment was as organist at St. James' Piccadilly, then St. Bartholomew's, New York. Following a brief return to London he returned to the U.S.A. with his appointment as conductor of the Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra (1909-1912). He became an American citizen in 1915.
He subsequently found world fame as conductor of the Philadelphia Orchestra (1912-1938). He reached an even wider audience as Musical Director of the Walt Disney cartoon film "Fantasia" (1940), and a little later appeared in the Hollywood musical "One Hundred Men and a Girl".
Stokowski chose to return to England to live out the few remaining years of his life in the peace of the Hampshire village of Middle Wallop. He now lies buried beside his parents and sister in the St. Marylebone Cemetery within earshot of London's North Circular Road, a far cry from the glamour of Hollywood.
In the 1920s/30s, much to the chagrin of purists, Stokowski transcribed a number of Bach's works for a large modern symphony orchestra. As far as this D minor Toccata and Fugue is concerned, present-day Bach scholars are divided as to its authenticity.
Through the broad spectrum of the tonal colour and dynamic range of the modern symphony orchestra, Stokowski builds on those inherent in the original organ score. In fact one of the accusations against such a transcription, apart from taking a few compositional liberties, was an unnecessary "gilding of the lily".
The word "Toccata" literally means "touch", and is usually associated with a work for solo keyboard instrument which requires great dexterity on the part of the performer and, overall, a piece of dynamic brilliance. The Fugue "a 3 voci" follows directly, and is interspersed with free fantasia sections. Bach heralds the work's end with a recitative passage, then through alternating slow and fast passages (based on a fragmented hint of the Fugue's first subject) the music reaches its magisterial final bars.
It is in this millennium year that we celebrate the 250th anniversary of the death of Johann Sebastian Bach.


Fashion snaps from the third event produced by the Bunka Fashion College students who publish Fanatic Tokyo Magazine.
50+ Japanese fashion snaps from the Fanatic Magazine Tokyo summer 2017 party.
Guerilla fashion show on the streets of Harajuku by dark Japanese streetwear brand BERCERK.


A joint INTERPOL and Trend Micro research paper on cybercrime activity across West Africa has revealed a significant growth in cyber frauds on individuals and businesses.
Combining survey results from INTERPOL member countries across the region with research findings by Trend Micro, the 'Cybercrime in West Africa: Poised for an Underground Market' paper shows West African cyber-criminals are increasingly using social engineering tactics.
The survey showed an increase of 132 per cent of reported cybercrime between 2013 and 2015, with an average of US $2.7 million from business and US $422,000 from individuals stolen each year. However an average of 30 per cent of cybercrimes reported to law enforcement in the region over the same period resulted in arrests.
The paper shows two major types of threat actors are active throughout the region – so-called 'Yahoo boys' and 'Next-Level Cybercriminals'.
Named for their reliance on Yahoo apps to communicate, the Yahoo boys came to prominence in the early 2000s, focusing on less technically advanced schemes such as advanced-fee, stranded traveller and romance frauds.
'Next-Level Cybercriminals' carry out more sophisticated attacks, such as Business Email Compromise (BEC) and tax frauds, often using keylogging software, Remote Access Trojans (RATs) and other crime-enabling software.
"This joint paper shows that criminals across the region are becoming more technically savvy, and this emerging underground market will require an even stronger law enforcement response in the future, both in terms of training for investigators and ensuring the appropriate legislation is in place," said Noboru Nakatani, Executive Director of INTERPOL's Global Complex for Innovation (IGCI).
"In addition to building awareness of cybercrime-related issues across West Africa and beyond, the research also highlights the importance of public-private partnerships in identifying and arresting criminals, as well as educating businesses and governments about cyber threats.
"The joint paper with Trend Micro, and other activities coordinated by the IGCI, demonstrate the Organization's ongoing commitment to collaborative partnerships to mitigate the damage caused by cybercriminals on the world economy and society," concluded Mr Nakatani.
In 2016, INTERPOL and the Nigerian Economic and Financial Crime Commission, supported by private sector partners including Trend Micro, carried out a joint operation which led to the arrest of 'Mike' in Nigeria, the alleged head of an international criminal network behind thousands of online frauds worth more than US $60 million and involving victims worldwide.
"Public-private partnerships are an integral part of Trend Micro's ongoing pursuit to make the digital world safer for everyone," said Raimund Genes, CTO of Trend Micro.
"We are always happy to collaborate with INTERPOL in joint efforts to expose and takedown cybercrime around the world. Through this research on West Africa, we hope to improve the security of this region and educate local governments, as well as global businesses, on the risks emanating from this region," added Mr Genes.
Also included in the joint INTERPOL-Trend Micro report is an overview of the activities of an alleged cybercriminal, who had mistakenly installed a keylogger on his own machine, enabling researchers to access his logs and follow the various stages of his different frauds.
Of the 16 INTERPOL member countries in West Africa, the following 11 responded to the survey: Benin, Cape Verde, Côte d'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Liberia, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal and Sierra Leone.


Samir Kochhar has already commenced shooting for the series. He will essay the role of Peter Fernandez in Typewriters, set in Goa.
Samir Kochhar is set to feature in Sujoy Ghosh's web series, Typewriters. The actor, who has been seen in digital offerings like Karrle Tu Bhi Mohabbat, The Test Case and Sacred Games, will essay the role of Peter Fernandez in the thriller, set in Goa.
Sources suggest that the horror revolves around a family's tryst with unnatural occurrences after it shifts base to Goa. It sees Peter's family grappling with various conspiracy theories, we're told. Kochhar has already commenced shooting for the series. The show also features Purab Kohli and Palomi Ghosh.
Badla box office collection: Sujoy Ghosh beats his own record!


Sidewinder versus Inline; the Great Debate Continues!
This spreadsheet is from the pre-race testing. It compares the rear wheel power of each car to the factory rated motor power. This doesn't factor in chassis losses.
Only the cars that were above normal were tested for their actual output.
The rules of the Shoot Out were only that certain Slot.It motors could be used, and certain other motors could not. No motor could be modified. That is all!
2.) Slot.it motors can be run-in prior to race.
3.) No changes or modifications to motors are permitted.
4.) Lead weight placed on motor is permitted.
5.) Motor shaft can be trimmed for tire clearance.
Now, if someone should obtain a higher performing motor, as bought, that is the luck of the draw. Evidently the 124% motor was an accidental acquisition.
A more stringent way to run the race would be to test every motor first, but since many people are in this hobby on a more casual basis, less stringent racing is more the norm. Another proxy, (CPR) includes motor tests, and I have tested motors in some races for which I was the tech inspector. It is time consuming, and so far, not a single "cheater" motor has shown up. When I build a car, I hope for a strong performing motor, but I make do with what I have.
On a related note, when I hosted the Shoot Out last summer, I had a car (Lou E's) that stuck to my track like glue, with otherwise normal, legal, factory issue S2 tires. His car didn't do as well on the other surfaces in the race, only on mine. I suspect it was due to production variation, as the S1's and S2's are known to vary widely.
When stock parts are specified, the luck of the draw becomes a factor.
I am sure WPSoko1, Smokeio, Nhdungeonracer, B52RN, Terry Noe, Bov, and TransIssues, are comforted by the news that motor performance is a non-issue.
All of these cars were better or equal too the second place car in in handling during my segment of the shootout.
If the motor performance was equal, who knows what the finishing order would have been.
If a simple rpm test would have been performed in the original scrutiny of the cars entered in the shootout, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
If the rules would have said any Slot it motor without any exclusions, the motors should still come close to factory specifications for the individual motors.
What is the sense of even mentioning the motor, as long as it fits in the car, when writing the rules?
Why would you go through all of the work of compiling an in depth motor list, if it means absolutely nothing?
How on earth do you expect every entrant to test their motor rpms, or even the Tech Inspection guys, if they don't have the equipment? Rediculous. These are toy cars. The rules have been met by the competitors in that they have allowed motors, that have not been opened/modified.
Robert covered it very well.
In your opinion. Fact is, anyone with several "identical" motors to choose from is almost certainly going to give them all a spin to see which one seems to be fastest. Or in my case, I chose that particular yellow endbell because it's already been through three hours of endurance running so I know it's strong and reliable.
In the case of this proxy series, I believe the intent was to ensure that (1) only Slot.it motors were used, this being a Slot.it Shootout, and (2) motors with potentially high downforce that could enhance car handling on mag tracks would not be allowed.
2) The exclusion of the others is to remove the magnet effect of the open can motors on plastic or routed track with magnabraid.
Dave, I'd like to take credit for having spent countless hours and $$$ sifting through dozens of slotit orange endbells looking for the perfect ringer, but alas, I think the expression "even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while" is more apropoe. Funny thing is, the story behind the now infamous orange can is this; I recieved it in trade for a Boxer/2, as I was running low on orange endbell motors due to many of my own having suffered the fate of early generation orange enbellitus (shorted com). The motor in question was a nearly new motor from a F40 kit. Just be grateful I didnt use a yellow can, as apparently my orange nearly matches it in output. Just think what would have happened if my car had the additional 2000rpm that your car did. You wouldnt have any excuses to justify your tantrum.
Would be good to move on please John; Dave could have, and probably should have, responded to the posts from Redlynr, Slotbutton, and myself that preceded yours. Instead he chose to start another thread that was really pretty insulting to one and all. I just closed that thread.
Would also be good if we could get a ruling on whether the results from round two are going to be counted please, and if not then an update to the scoresheet would be great around now, including any penalties etc. Thanks!


text:
Косогоры — село в Большеберезниковском районе Мордовии. Административный центр Косогорского сельского поселения. В селе числится 4 улицы: Интернациональная, Нагорная, Ленина, Советская.

География
Расположено на речке Семилейке в 25 км от железнодорожной станции Чамзинка. Находится в 13 км северо-западу от районного центра — села Большие Березники и 39 км к востоку от Саранска. Высота центра селения над уровнем моря — 175 м.

Название
По мнению А. А. Гераклитова, название-характеристика: население обосновалось у склона горы.

Современное название Косогоры русское, сами же жители говорят: «Госагыр вэлэ». Первоначальное название Косогор было- Новые Кергуды. Село так же называли Никольское.

Основание
Косогоры считаются переселенческим селом и относятся к числу наиболее ранних поселений в Мордовском Присурье.

Инфраструктура

В селе расположены средняя школа, Дом культуры, медпункт, библиотека, магазин.

Население

На 2001 год численность населения составляла 567 человека.

Достопримечательности

 Памятник воинам-землякам, погибшим в годы Великой Отечественной войны.
 Никольский храм — памятник архитектуры республиканского значения.

Известные жители

Уроженцы села
 Арташкин Пётр Трофимович — участник Великой Отечественной войны. Был награждён Орденом Отечественной Войны, а также медалями «За отвагу», «За победу над Германией» и многими юбилейными наградами. Умер в Самаре 11 марта 2007 года. Похоронен на Рубежном кладбище г. Самара на ветеранской аллее.
 Вдовин Иван Сергеевич — участник Великой Отечественной войны.
 Маркин Андрей Семенович — участник Великой Отечественной войны. Погиб при штурме Берлина 27 апреля 1945 года в звании гвардии старший лейтенант. Являлся командиром взвода Т34. Был посмертно награждён Орденом Отечественной войны второй степени 26.06.1945 г..
 Пьянзина Надежда Сергеевна — медицинская сестра, в 2006 году была признана лучшей детской медицинской сестрой в Республике Мордовия. Приз ей вручал лично Глава Республики Мордовия — Николай Иванович Меркушкин.
 Пантелей Егорович Николаев — участник русско-турецкой войны 1877—1878 гг., был награждён Георгиевским крестом, именной шпагой и кисетом, вышитым золотом.
 Александра Петровна Лавровская — знаменитый педагог дважды награждена орденами Ленина, Трудового Красного Знамени.

Примечания

Литература
 Гераклитов А. А. Алатырская мордва. — Саранск, 1938.

Источник
 Энциклопедия Мордовия, Н. Н. Щемерова.

Населённые пункты Большеберезниковского района

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


It's the battle of the Source Fortresses - Team Fortress 2 and Fortress Forever. What are the differences? Are they the same? Why bother with one when we got the other? Well, read the article and find out!
These are questions that have been raging in many a forum since Team Fortress 2 was announced, and especially more in this last month with the flurry of activity and beta releases on both parties parts. What's the difference between Team Fortress 2 and Fortress Forever? Isn't Fortress Forever just a knock off of TF2/TFC? Why should I pay for Team Fortress 2 when Fortress Forever is free? Aren't they competing? Which should I play?
Well, I'm posting this to clarify those questions. At first glance (at least first audible glance), yeah, there could be obvious links made between the two. After all, they're both based off of Team Fortress Classic, so you would think they're very similar. Well, I'll tell you here and now, the only similarities are the fact that there are 9 classes with the same name, a few maps with the same names, and the word Fortress appears in both titles. The similarities end there.
We'll start off with the most obvious difference, and that's graphical. Team Fortress 2 has a more "barnyard" feel, the models aren't just unrealistic, but they're completely exaggerated and blown completely out of proportion. Team Fortress is a game that is far from realistic, so why not have some fun with that? Fortress Forever on the other hand stays closer to the classic appearance of anatomically correct bodies, (somewhat) believable weapons, and more sensible level designs. Neither of these styles detracts from the sense of the games, but the visuals help set both apart from each other – not only with the obvious visual difference, but it also adds a whole new atmosphere to both games.
A comparison of the Engineer models in game and in action.
Classes in Team Fortress 2 and Fortress Forever are like apples and orange. Both are fruits, but in a taste test, even the most primitive animals could distinguish between the two. As with the graphics, Fortress Forever sticks closer to what Team Fortress Classic represented with in regards to the class structures. The same weapons are available in TFC as in FF, and with very few differences. That's not to say that they're exact copies, there are in fact differences, but for a veteran TFC player, the FF classes are less alien than those of Team Fortress 2, which have all undergone extensive redesigns to ensure a perfect balance and to distinguish all classes from one another (such as the Pyro from the Soldier) and to make other classes more pertinent to gameplay (like the Medic and the Scout).
Both Team Fortress 2 and Fortress Forever bring in new maps, but both also contain some of the more popular classics. Again, most of what's different with the maps is visual – going from the cartoonish feel of Team Fortress 2 to the closer-to-reality feeling of Fortress Forever, but the layouts have changed as well in your favourite classics. Team Fortress 2 is most evident of this with all of the included classic maps, apart from looking almost unrecognizable, have added new paths, edited others, and played with the overall sizes of the maps. This is especially evident in (my favourite map) Dustbowl. When I first played this map, I had a general idea where I was in some sections, but after a few seconds of scratching my head. Fortress Forever, for the most part, keeps the maps closer to what we all know and love from TFC, although some maps (such as Crossover) do include new paths and layout differences. So even if you play the same map in both games, you're still not actually playing the same map.
One of the biggest and easily the most controversial differences is the lack of grenades in Team Fortress 2. Yes, that's right – grenadeless. Fortress Forever, on the other hand, still has all of the grenades you remember from TFC, and thus is theoretically more appealing to TFC veterans in that aspect. Both having and not having grenades in each game respectively has both benefits and disadvantages, so it all depends on how much you love to make things go boom.
Okay, so I lied, there is another similarity between the two games. Both Team Fortress 2 and Fortress Forever set a very high level of quality for their respective arenas. I've played a lot of video games in my day, and just as many modifications of such, and I can sit here and in all honesty state that TF2 is one of the, if not the most polished multiplayer-specific game I've seen to date. Fortress Forever is again within the top 5 mods for any game that I've played that has such a polished look and feel that you can't help but compare the others to it.
So can you really go wrong playing either or? No, it all depends on what you're looking for in the game. Do you want to play what you know best as Team Fortress Classic? Then give Fortress Forever a download. If you want a sequel to TFC that has similar elements, but is a completely new game, then Team Fortress 2 is for you. You could even play both of them and you would get all of the benefits that both have to offer without getting bored of both, as, and I can't stress this enough, they are two completely different products.
Don't believe me? Well, you can always read the corresponding reviews that are published with this article. If you want to take it a step further (and have the money), then buy Team Fortress 2 and download Fortress Forever. Either way, whether you've been playing team Fortress since the Quake days or you just heard about it today, you're going to have a fun time, and who knows, maybe you just found your new favourite!


NICHOLAS BURRESS was booked on 11/8/2018 1:19:00 PM. BURRESS was arrested by CAMPBELLSVILLE POLICE in Campbellsville, Kentucky. BURRESS was 33 years old at the time of the arrest.
NICHOLAS BURRESS may not have been convicted of the charges or crimes listed and are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Please contact the CAMPBELLSVILLE POLICE for more information regarding arrest records.


Our team of dermatologists at Dermatology & Laser Surgery Center offer a number of advanced procedures that can renew the appearance of the hands. While the most conspicuous signs of aging or skin damage can appear along the face, many individuals become very self-conscious when they notice prominent changes to the hands, as well. The natural aging process, sun exposure, and even just continuous use of the hands can lead to a loss of collagen, thinning skin, more noticeable veins, wrinkles, and a "skeletal" appearance. With procedures such as Radiesse® injections and Fraxel laser skin resurfacing, we can help you rejuvenate the look of your hands.
Radiesse® is an injectable dermal filler composed of calcium-based microspheres which can help stimulate the growth of collagen in the skin. While more commonly known to smooth out facial wrinkles and add volume to facial features, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has also approved Radiesse® as a hand rejuvenation treatment. Injection of Radiesse® into targeted areas of the hands can restore lost volume and diminish the appearance of prominent veins and bones, producing a healthier and younger look. The treatment is a quick, in-office procedure, and a numbing cream can be applied prior to treatment to minimize discomfort.
In addition to its remarkable effects, the results of Radiesse® are known to be long-lasting. In fact, many patients have experienced the benefits of Radiesse® for up to two years..
For hands that are exhibiting prominent signs of brown spots, sun damage, and areas of discoloration, Fraxel laser skin resurfacing is an ideal solution. Fraxel laser treatment can usually be completed in about 15 minutes, following an hour of topical anesthetic. While some temporary redness and swelling in the treatment areas are common after Fraxel laser procedures, downtime is typically 3-5 days.
Radiesse® and Fraxel laser resurfacing can be combined for patients who are experiencing both a loss of volume as well as discoloration and texture concerns along their hands. These treatments have shown to provide long-lasting, beautiful results, and have helped many individuals feel more confident in their appearance.
Hand rejuvenation procedures can ultimately enhance volume and firmness of the skin while giving the hands a more youthful and healthy look. If you are considering treatment to revitalize the appearance of your hands, we encourage you to schedule a consultation here at Dermatology & Laser Surgery Center. Our dermatologists will be happy to answer your questions and help you determine the best treatment option for your unique needs and goals.


Bob Locher, W9KNI is IMO, a classic DXer. Over 30 years ago – in 1983 – he published a book called The Complete DXer. According to Bob, the book was intended to make the point that DXing is a fun endeavor that requires skills that can -- and must – be learned.
Despite the steady flow of information provided by the introduction of the Internet into DXing, however, The Complete DXer still makes a point: DXing is fun. It describes the hunt for DX, and it emphasizes that DXing is a game that can and must be learned. The Complete DXer describes – among many other things – the technique of listening; being aware of what it going on. Absolutely nothing is more important in DXing. When it comes right down to actually making a QSO, the Internet is a no match for actually listening. The third (and latest) version of The Complete DXer provides a valuable perspective on modern DXing. If nothing else, it puts a 'modern DXer' into a framework to understand the all-to-often neglected essentials of DXing.
The Complete DXer and a companion A Year of DX published in 2010 are very readable and helpful additions to your DX library. They are currently available from the ARRL.


text:
Mary Hoerle
Name Mary Hoerle
Born 1873 Wellesley Twp., Waterloo Region, Ontario, Canada [1, 2, 3]
Name Maria Hoerle
Eby ID Number Waterloo-107650
Died 19 Oct 1903 Wellesley Twp., Waterloo Region, Ontario, Canada [2, 3]
Cause: Severe Headache & Convulsions
Buried Saint John's Lutheran Cemetery, Bamberg, Waterloo Region, Ontario, Canada [2]
Person ID I107650 Generations
Father Henry Hoerle, b. 1825, , Germany , d. Bef 1881 (Age < 55 years)
Mother Catherine Seip, b. 1835, , Ontario, Canada , d. Yes, date unknown
DIED SUDDENLY.
The very unexpected death of Miss Mary Hoerle, occurred at the home of Mrs. Glaister, east of Crosshill last Monday evening, in her 30th year. The young woman had been in the employ of Mrs. Glaister for the past six years and was apparently in the best of health. About two o'clock in the afternoon she was seized with a severe headache, and later in the day the physician saw her but found no symptoms beyond the headache to which she was subject. Shortly after he had gone, however, she became alarmingly ill and he was again sent for, but before his arrival she had passed away. Deceased was born on her father's homestead just north of Greenwood's hill and had lived in the vicinity all her life. Her funeral occurs this (Thursday) morning at 10 o'clock.
Wellesley Maple Leaf, October 22, 1903
is supplied by the Wellesley Township Heritage and Historical Society Click here to go to their website.
[S113] Census - ON, Waterloo, Wellesley Twp. - 1881, Division 3 Page 10.
[S421] Cemetery - ON, Waterloo, Wellesley - St. Johns Lutheran Bamberg CC#4537 Internet Link.
Maria/ Toch.von/ Heinrich u.Katha./ Hoerle/ gest.19 Oct. 1903/ Alter 29 Jah./ 9 Mo.u.9 Ta.
[S2191] News - ON, Waterloo, Wellesley - Wellesley Maple Leaf, Died Suddenly - October 22, 1903.
Born - 1873 - Wellesley Twp., Waterloo Region, Ontario, Canada
Died - Cause: Severe Headache & Convulsions - 19 Oct 1903 - Wellesley Twp., Waterloo Region, Ontario, Canada
Buried - - Saint John's Lutheran Cemetery, Bamberg, Waterloo Region, Ontario, Canada


They were going to crucify him. And there wasn't a thing I could do to stop it.
Yet even in my despair, I felt a grim resolve grow in me. No matter what, Jesus would know that I loved him. That I loved him to the end.
A crushing throng jammed the side of the road leading outside the city walls to the hill of Golgotha, the site of execution. I fought my way as far along as possible, determined to be at the end of the long road waiting for him. Meanwhile, I was utterly alone, bereft of even a single compassionate face in this maelstrom of vicious hate.
Whirling in astonishment at the sound of my name, I looked around frantically, my eyes falling to rest on Mary, Jesus' mother, and Mary Magdalene.
Her unwavering voice belied her trembling hands. "My son needs me." Dark hair framed her face, which was lined with distress.
"After all the Lord has done for me," Mary Magdalene spoke up, "I'm not going to leave him now." She shivered, clutching her cloak around her shoulders, but her jaw was set firmly.
A shrill trumpet blast shattered the air, announcing the approach of the execution party and cutting off my words. Gripping Mary's hand, I dragged her through the crowd, muscling out a path, until we broke out onto the side of the road. There, coming towards us in the midst of a detachment of soldiers, bent under the weight of an enormous crossbeam and covered in blood, sweat, and dust, was Jesus. He stumbled closer, never looking up, unable to recognize our faces in the sea of enmity.
My dry throat refused to make any sound, but Mary called out, "Jesus? Jesus, my son." Her voice was soft and lovely, undaunted by the barbarism surrounding us.
And he heard her. Pausing, he stopped and gazed into her eyes so tenderly it made my heart ache. A profound exchange passed between them without a word. Then the moment ended as a soldier shoved him, spurring him on ahead.
It was a slow, arduous journey, but we finally made it by the time the noon sun was blazing overhead. "Please! Please let us through!" I begged. Once again, I had no choice but to push and shove a path for us through the densely packed ring of spectators, as nobody would yield. Gasping, I finally burst out on the edge of the crowd, still gripping Mary's hand. Up on top of the hill, the Roman soldiers had gathered so closely that I couldn't see Jesus. Two other men already hung on crosses, one on the right, and the other on the left. A third cross lay on the ground in between them. Then, as the crowded soldiers began to spread out, I caught a glimpse of Jesus being yanked closer . . .
I turned away, stepping protectively in front of the women and burying my face in my hands. I could not watch this. I simply could not bear to.
Time seemed to grind to a halt and stretch out so long it became unendurable. I waited, not daring to breathe.
Then I heard the sound I had been dreading, the sharp ring of a hammer striking a nail.
Mary cried out beside me; I cringed, squeezing my ears shut. All to no avail. A second blow followed, then a third, then a fourth, in a seemingly endless staccato rhythm. Each one pierced my ears with acute agony, as if it was boring into my own flesh.
After an eternity, they stopped. I waited, motionless, then I heard the strained groans, creaking wood, and an ominous thunk.
Heaving a deep breath, I forced my eyes open, wiping my clammy hands on my robe. I blinked. The world suddenly seemed darker. Was I actually hallucinating? No – darkness was slowly creeping across the sky, swallowing up the sun.
I barely noticed the dying light once I turned around.
My Lord and my God, whom I had followed these three long years, the one who cured the cripples, cast out demons, and raised the dead, hung on the newly erected cross, right between the two criminals.
I quailed at the sight, terrible to behold. Nausea churned in my stomach. My knees shook, and it was all I could do to keep from collapsing. My head spun at the enormity of the equally terrible thought searing through my mind. This is the end of everything . . . How can there be anything good be in this world if even God Himself is helpless before the power of evil?
Every word Jesus had ever spoken vanished from my mind in the face of such unspeakable horror. Despair gripped my mind, as I realized I didn't have a single answer to the crowd's accusations. My every muscle tensed with the desire to flee, run away from this disaster like James, Peter, and the others.
I gasped as those words suddenly unleashed a flood of emotion deep within me. I no longer saw him hanging from the cross; instead, I saw him transfigured before us on Mount Tabor, radiant with dazzling light. Oblivious to the carnage before my eyes, I relived that fleeting but glorious moment all over again. Amid the foreboding darkness of the world, I clung to the shaft of light, and hope returned to me. This was my chance to prove that I loved him to the end.
If I deserted him now, I would regret it for the rest of my life.
My resolve turned iron, as if from a strength that was not my own. At Mary's nod, I took her arm and slowly led her up the hill, step by step. Mary Magdalene followed us. My legs trembled, but I forced them to keep working, keeping my eyes lowered until we crested the hill and stood beneath the cross. I raised my eyes, fresh tears flowing freely down my face at the sight of my Lord's mangled, bleeding body.
So this is the hour he refused to turn away from. This is what he meant when he asked James and me if we could share the cup with him. He knew all along that this was it, while we had no idea what we were asking for. We had no idea we were so unworthy of what we were asking for. . .
I blinked through my tears, shuddering at the nails brutally piercing his feet. I was foolish and naïve then, but I was here now, doing all I could to share the bitter cup with him. Not even a legion of Roman soldiers could drag me away.
Jesus opened his eyes and looked down at me. His gaze brimmed with so much love that I immediately felt ashamed for all my cowardice, ignorance, and bravado, yet also rewarded beyond measure.
My mouth dropped open. He's entrusting his mother to me? Those three words were charged with significance, a gesture of pardon for my many failures and a profound statement of love. Yet I also sensed another, mores subtle meaning in Jesus' tone, one encompassing far more than I could ever comprehend, one stretching beyond me. Too choked to speak, I nodded to let him know that I wouldn't betray his trust again, then turned to Mary. Her lips trembled as we made eye contact; I wrapped my arm around her as she sagged against my shoulder.
I lost all sense of time, wondering how long this agony would last. Sheer helplessness twisted inside me as I wished I hung on that cross instead of Him. The brooding darkness still hung over the earth, grimly appropriate.
Then Jesus let out a loud cry. "My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?" The abject anguish and misery suffusing those words chilled me to my core. My vision blurred; a wave of darkness surged into my consciousness, threatening to engulf me. I gasped, teetering at the edge of a precipice, about to tumble over the edge of despair into the devil's waiting arms . . .
Just as I was about to give up, and believe God really had abandoned us, a memory flashed into my mind, unbidden – Jesus at the supper table the night before, passing around the bread and the chalice after blessing them with those enigmatic words. Take this, all of you, and eat of it, for this is my body, which will be given up for you. Take this, all of you, and drink from it, for this is the chalice of my blood, the blood of the new and eternal covenant, which will be poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.
And once again, that mysterious strength that was not my own returned to me, eradicating the darkness and flooding my mind with gratifying, nourishing light. I steadied myself and stood firm once again. Opening my eyes, I tried to shut out the callous atrocity surrounding me and focus on him, hoping I could help him by offering my wordless support, as meager as it was. He has given me trust I don't deserve; now it's my turn to trust him. I've trusted him this long, and he has not led me astray . . .
More raucous laughter rang out. One soldier shoved past me, carrying a soaked sponge on the end of a reed, which he held up to Jesus.
I stood petrified, my mind numb. The earth began to quake, as if groaning from within, throwing me to the ground. I clung to the splintery wood of the cross and pulled myself up. Sobs wracked my entire body as I gently touched the broken, bleeding feet, pressing them to my cheek. I didn't move for a long time.


somewhere in new jersey…I got stuck on this roof making this video! I love to dance, dancehall is my weapon of choice. With moves inspired by crews such as the Ground Zeroes, Sopreme Blazers, Rifical Team, the Pyrotechs and too many more to name. Thanks to the young folk, inspiring the old dawgs such as myself.


text:
What's the factual basis for killing Awlaki?
June 23, 2014 Kevin Lees	Leave a comment
Though we don't necessarily know incredibly much more about the US government's factual basis for the targeted killing in September 2011 of Anwar al-Awlaki, a US citizen, the release of an Obama administration memo earlier today by a federal appeals court sheds new light on the administration's legal rationale:
A federal appeals court in New York on Monday made public a redacted version of a 2010 Justice Department memo that signed off on the targeted killing of an American citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki, without a trial, following Freedom of Information Act lawsuits. The memo, signed by David Barron, who was then the acting head of the department's Office of Legal Counsel and is now a federal appeals court judge in Boston, concluded that it would be lawful to target Mr. Awlaki for killing if his capture was not feasible. Intelligence analysts had concluded that Mr. Awlaki was an operational terrorist.
The Obama administration fought the disclosure, initially refusing to confirm or deny the memo's existence. In January 2013, a Federal District Court judge ruled that it could keep the memo secret. But in April, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that portions of the memo containing legal analysis — but not those compiling the evidence against Mr. Awlaki — must be made public.
The memo argues that 18 U.S.C. § 1119, which addresses the foreign killing of US nationals, must incorporate the public authority exception, and it further argues that the exception permits either the US Department of Defense and/or the US Central Intelligence Agency to carry out the contemplated operation against Awlaki.
The memo also argues that Awlaki's US citizenship doesn't preclude DoD or CIA action, citing Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, the 2004 Supreme Court ruling that, subject to certain due process requirements, permits the detention of a US citizen as an 'enemy combatant.'
Sharper legal minds will parse the contents of the memo, parts of which were redacted, and it presents many obviously difficult questions:
Even if the US military is justified in killing Awlaki under the public authority exception, the CIA's justification is a lot more controversial because it's a US government agency, not the military. The heavy redactions in the memo, as it relates to the CIA, make the Justice Department's rationale unclear.
The US government's statutory basis for targeting Awlaki lies in the Authorization to Use Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF), originally enacted in 2001, which authorizes efforts not only against al-Qaeda, but also against forces 'associated with' al-Qaeda, including Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). The argument is that this as true in Yemen (which, the Justice Department attorneys admit, is 'far from the most active theater of combat' between the United States and al-Qaeda.') as it is in Afghanistan or anywhere in the world that al-Qaeda and 'associated forces' operate. But that broad global-battlefield interpretation isn't universally accepted, even among many members of the US Congress that enacted the AUMF.
The memo contemplates that Awlaki's US citizenship bestows some protections, even in Yemen, under the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause and the Fourth Amendment. As regards the Fifth Amendment, the memo again points to Hamdi, which uses a Mathews v. Eldridge balancing test. In a scenario where a US citizen/enemy combatant poses a continued and imminent threat, the Justice Department attorneys argue that the public interest far outweighs the private interest of guaranteeing due process. Though the memo also acknowledges that Awlaki's targeting constitutes a 'seizure' under the Fourth Amendment, the memo again points to the 'reasonableness' balancing tests elucidated by the Supreme Court in prior rulings on the constitutionality of seizures.
Nevertheless, the true heart of this case isn't necessarily the black-letter legal reasoning, fascinating and controversial though it may be. Throughout the memo, the Justice Department attorneys essentially assume Awlaki's guilt as fact. That's fine, because no one was asking the Office of Legal Counsel to assess Awlaki's guilt. But it's one thing to argue that the AUMF applies in full force to the US government's ability to target enemy combatants who are US citizens, and it's quite another thing to argue that Awlaki was an enemy combatant in the first place.
Even if you are willing to defer to the Obama administration's interpretation on all of the issues of the law involved — the applicability of the AUMF, the applicability of the public authority exception, the non-applicability of the Fifth Amendment, the Fourth Amendment or any mitigating factors that accrue on the basis of US citizenship — we still don't know how the US government determines how a US citizen can be lawfully targeted for legal force.
The most relevant question, still unanswered, is how the US government concluded that Awlaki crossed the line from 'preacher spewing noxious opinions' to 'operational al-Qaeda militant.'
First, what specific actions did Awlaki take that caused him to be enemy combatant?
Secondly, on the basis of what evidence did the US government determine that Awlaki was an enemy combatant?
Finally, does anything about the process that the US government deployed in targeting Awlaki meet any kind of standards for due process, let alone those typically granted to US citizens under the Fifth Amendment?
On all three questions, we don't know the answer because the Obama administration won't release any information. Until and unless it does, the evidentiary standard for assassinating a US citizen abroad seems to be 'when high-level government officials conclude it.'
Note the factual conclusion that the memo incorporates:
High-level government officials have concluded, on the basis of al-Aulaqi's activities in Yemen, that al-Aulaqi is a leader of AQAP whose activities in Yemen pose a 'continued and imminent threat' of violence to United States persons and interests. Indeed, the facts represented to us indicate that al-Aulaqi has been involved, through his operational and leadership roles within AQAP, in an abortive attack within the United States and continues to plot attacks intended to kill Americans from his base of operations in Yemen. The contemplated DoD operation, therefore, would be carried out against someone who is within the core of individuals against whom Congress has authorized the use of necessary and appropriate force.
But as Jeremy Scahill and other reporters have documented, there's nothing in the public domain that necessarily implicates Awlaki in any operational. Consider this passage from Scahill's book, Dirty Wars: The World is a Battlefield:
Awlaki began to achieve almost mythical status in the US media and government narrative on terrorist threats. But the real question was how big a threat he actually posed. Although the dispute did not play out publicly, there was deep division in the intelligence community over how to approach Awlaki. There was abundant evidence that he had praised attacks against the United States after the fact and had been in touch with [Ft. Hood shooter Nidal Malik] Hasan and [Nigerian 'underwear bomber' Umar Farouk] Abdulmutallab. There was also evidence that he called for violent jihad against the United States and its allies. But there was no conclusive evidence presented, at least not publicly, that Awlaki had played an operational role in any attacks.
Consider an analogy from World War II. If a US citizen happened to be shooting at US soldiers in Italy in 1942, it's not controversial that US soldiers would have the right to shoot back. But what if that US citizen wasn't shooting at US soldiers? What if that US citizen had moved to Turin, and spent his days publishing newspapers that championed the Axis Powers, embraced the ideologies of Nazism and Fascism, denounced the US war effort against Italy, and otherwise emboldened Italian fighters in the war against the United States and its allies? There's a huge difference. That's not exactly sitting in the bunker plotting strategy with Mussolini.
If the CIA had evidence that Awlaki was an operational actor within AQAP, why not release it now? Remove the doubt about Awlaki's culpability (or not), but have an honest debate about how the US government can effectively target US citizens abroad who are actively assisting al-Qaeda and US enemies.
'Trust us, because we're [the CIA/Defense/the US military],' isn't good enough.
'Trust us, because we're a [Republican/Democratic] administration,' also isn't good enough.
What makes the lack of accountability so troubling is that there are already signs that the US government has abused its power in the Awlaki case as it relates to the killing of Awlaki's 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman just two weeks after Awlaki's death.
If there's no public evidence that Anwar was an operational agent for AQAP, there's absolutely no evidence implicating Abdulrahman in any wrongdoing, and government officials basically admit as much. His only crime seems to have been traveling to Yemen to look for his father. Yet the Obama administration didn't admit that any US citizens had been killed in Yemen for two years, and when it did acknowledge Abdulrahman's death, it claimed only that Abdulrahman wasn't the target of the strike. Scahill and others have reported that even members of the Obama administration are skeptical that Abdulrahman's death wasn't unintentional, and the coincidental timing should be enough to warrant a wider inquiry.
So while the release of the Justice Department memo today is a strong step toward greater transparency, and will undoubtedly aid a more thoughtful legal and moral debate on when the US government can use lethal force against US citizens, it would be a much richer conversation if the Obama administration provided even more information about its decision-making in the Awlaki case.
abdulrahman al-awlakial qaedaanwar al-awlakiAUMFawlakiCIAdue processhamdijustice departmentobamaUnited Statesyemen
Previous PostWho is Radek Sikorski?Next PostAbdelaziz wins reelection as Mauritania's president
Support Suffragio
About Suffragio
Suffragio attempts to bring thoughtful analysis to the political, economic and other policy issues that are central to countries outside of the US -- to make world politics less foreign to the US audience. Suffragio focuses, in particular, on those countries and regions with upcoming or recent elections.
Choose a country:
Choose a country: Select Category 14 in 14 (17) 15 in 15 (1) 17 in 17 (1) Abkhazia (1) Afghanistan (14) African Union (1) Albania (3) Alberta (10) Algeria (9) Andalusia (2) Andhra Pradesh (2) Angola (4) Antigua and Barbuda (1) Argentina (19) Armenia (4) Arunachal Pradesh (1) Assam (3) Assorted Links (126) Australia (40) Austria (16) Azerbaijan (2) Baden-Württemberg (2) Bahamas (1) Baja California (1) Bangladesh (11) Barbados (2) Basque Country (7) Bavaria (5) Belarus (4) Belgium (9) Benin (1) Berlin (1) Bhutan (2) Bihar (5) Bolivia (4) Books (4) Bosnia/Herzegovina (4) Botswana (1) Brandenburg (2) Brazil (30) Bretagne (1) British Columbia (3) Brunei (1) Buenos Aires (2) Bulgaria (10) Burkina Faso (4) Burma/Myanmar (5) Burundi (6) Calabria (2) Cambodia (2) Cameroon (2) Campania (2) Canada (104) CAR (Centrafrique) (7) Catalonia (7) Catalunya (9) Cayman Islands (1) Chad (2) Chattisgarh (2) Chechnya (1) Chihuahua (1) Chile (8) China (49) Colombia (17) Comparative Politics (7) Corsica (1) Costa Rica (8) Côte d'Ivoire (1) Crimea (2) Croatia (6) Cuba (18) Cyprus (10) Czech Republic (17) Delhi (6) Denmark (13) District of Columbia (1) Djibouti (1) Dominican Republic (5) DRC / Congo (2) Ecuador (7) Egypt (49) El Salvador (9) Emilia-Romagna (1) England (2) Equatorial Guinea (1) Eritrea (1) Estonia (6) Ethiopia (7) European Union (76) Falkland Islands (2) Finland (6) Flanders (3) Florida (1) France (109) French Polynesia (1) Gabon (1) Galicia (6) Gambia (1) Georgia (13) Germany (69) Ghana (8) Goa (1) Greece (67) Greenland (5) Grenada (2) Guatemala (11) Guerrero (1) Guinea (6) Gujarat (6) Guyana (1) Haiti (4) Hamburg (1) Haryana (3) Hesse (2) Honduras (28) Hong Kong (11) Hungary (12) Iceland (8) India (69) Indonesia (22) Iowa (2) Iran (32) Iraq (12) Iraqi Kurdistan (6) Ireland (20) Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) (2) Israel (49) Italy (81) Jakarta (1) Jamaica (4) Jammu and Kashmir (1) Japan (24) Jharkhand (1) Jordan (2) Jubaland (1) Kaliningrad (1) Karnataka (4) Kazakhstan (3) Kenya (19) Kerala (3) Kosovo (3) Kuwait (1) Latvia (7) Lazio (2) Lebanon (16) Lesotho (2) Liberia (3) Libya (7) Liguria (1) Lithuania (11) Lombardia (2) London (1) Lower Saxony (2) Luxembourg (6) Macau (1) Macedonia (3) Madagascar (5) Madhya Pradesh (3) Maharashtra (3) Malawi (1) Malaysia (4) Maldives (6) Mali (18) Malta (3) Manitoba (1) Maryland (1) Mauritania (4) Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (2) Mexico (36) Michoacán (1) Minas Gerais (1) Miranda (1) mississippi (1) Moldova (1) Monaco (1) Mongolia (1) Montenegro (3) Nagorno-Karabakh (1) Namibia (2) Nauru (1) Nepal (1) New Brunswick (1) New South Wales (2) New York (2) New Zealand (7) Newfoundland (3) Nicaragua (2) Niger (1) Nigeria (11) Nizhny Novgorod (1) North Korea (3) North Rhine-Westphalia (1) Northern Ireland (8) Norway (11) Nova Scotia (2) Nuevo Leon (1) Odisha (2) Oman (1) Ontario (9) Osaka (1) Pakistan (25) Palestine (6) Panama (5) Papua New Guinea (1) Paraguay (5) Paris (4) Pernambuco (1) Personal (29) Peru (10) Philippines (9) Poland (12) Portugal (7) Puerto Rico (7) Puglia (3) Punjab (3) Qatar (1) Quebec (35) Rajasthan (2) Rhineland Palatinate (1) Romania (10) Rome (1) Russia (48) Rwanda (4) Saarland (1) San Marino (1) Saskatchewan (1) Saudi Arabia (6) Saxony (2) Saxony-Anhalt (1) Scotland (26) Senegal (16) Serbia (15) Sicily (6) Sierra Leone (5) Sikkim (3) Singapore (4) Slovakia (6) Slovenia (6) Somalia (5) Somaliland (1) South Africa (19) South Australia (1) South Korea (22) South Sudan (4) Spain (39) Sri Lanka (3) St. Pierre et Miquelon (1) Sudan (3) Swaziland (1) Sweden (11) Switzerland (6) Syria (32) Taiwan (5) Tajikistan (1) Tamil Nadu (6) Tanzania (2) Tasmania (1) Telangana (3) Texas (3) Thailand (10) The Netherlands (27) Thuringia (3) Tibet (1) Timor-Leste (1) Togo (3) Tokyo (1) Toronto (2) Trinidad and Tobago (1) Tunisia (5) Turkey (23) Tuscany (1) Uganda (4) Ukraine (27) Uncategorized (17) United Kingdom (131) United Nations (3) United States (207) Upper Austria (1) Uruguay (3) Uttar Pradesh (6) Uttarakhand (1) Vatican City (8) Veneto (2) Venezuela (72) Victoria (1) Vienna (2) Vietnam (5) Wales (1) Wallonia (1) West Bengal (6) Western Australia (1) WTO (2) Xinjiang (1) Yemen (4) Zambia (4) Zanzibar (1) Zimbabwe (8) Zulia (2)
In fairness, there may be Space Ents. https://t.co/DIxUUiuMaI 01:14:12 PM January 18, 2020 from Twitter Web App
RT @realDonaldTrump: Steyer is running low on cash. Nobody knows him. Made his money on coal. So funny! https://t.co/vS48ta5IFr 12:44:49 AM January 15, 2020 from Twitter Web App
RT @matthewstoller: For the first time I feel like Trump is going to win re-election. Democrats are just so out of touch, it's like the Dem… 11:12:34 PM January 14, 2020 from Twitter Web App
Now more than ever, Oman (and the Middle East) needs a successor worthy of the legacy Sultan Qaboos leaves behind: https://t.co/O1YXzn5vwd 02:47:40 PM January 13, 2020 from Twitter Web App
In no small part, Booker had to deal constantly with thinly veiled comments like this that smack of homophobia that… https://t.co/Dik7ZUUk3e 12:29:50 PM January 13, 2020 from Twitter Web App
If you say so, @Grindr https://t.co/ag3OikgTSn 09:54:12 PM January 08, 2020 from Twitter for Android
Gotta, admit @TuckerCarlson has been very thoughtful on Iran in the last 96 hours; his takedown here of @BenSasse i… https://t.co/93f3kgyjD7 10:54:37 PM January 06, 2020 from Twitter Web App
Iran 2020 is not Iran 1979. Saudis are just as bad, it's a cold war! Of course there're proxies. What's great about… https://t.co/1vWgZsdLDC 04:00:24 PM January 06, 2020 from Twitter Web App
So I take that @DrPaulGosar is endorsing Ahmadinejad. https://t.co/u4tf6ETRYx 03:56:49 PM January 06, 2020 from Twitter Web App
With this statement, I give notice to Facebook it is strictly forbidden to disclose, copy, distribute, or take any… https://t.co/d6aTDzf8d5 06:07:52 PM January 05, 2020 from Twitter for Android
RT @aliarouzi: Very very unusual to see a red flag flying over holy mosque of Jamkaran in Qom, Iran's holiest city. It's is almost always b… 05:54:29 PM January 05, 2020 from Twitter for Android
RT @RichardEngel: What a mess in the Middle East. Shiite world enraged. Sunni states nervous. Isis fight on back burner. US allies against… 05:52:58 PM January 05, 2020 from Twitter for Android
@suffragio
assad austerity berlusconi Cameron canada CDU chavez china coalition Congress conservative democratic party egypt European Union France germany greece Hollande india iran israel Italy labor labour liberal liberal party marine le pen merkel modi obama PD PS putin republican russia Sarkozy social democrats syria syriza tory trump tsipras United Kingdom United States venezuela
Like Suffragio on Facebook


text:
Yahshua name meaning
Yahshua
Origin:Hebrew
What does the name Yahshua mean? Keep reading to find the user submitted meanings, dictionary definitions, and more.
Origin and Meaning of Yahshua
A submission from New York, U.S. says the name Yahshua means "Messiah".
Submit the origin and/or meaning of Yahshua to us below
Origin of Yahshua
Yahshua Means
Tags:Biblical, Hebrew Names
Notable Persons With the Last Name Yahshua
Prince was born on March 21st, 1970 in Chicago, Illinois, U.S.
Fun Facts about the name Yahshua
How Popular is the name Yahshua? Yahshua is the 24,788th most popular name of all time.
How many people with the first name Yahshua have been born in the United States? From 1880 to 2019, the Social Security Administration has recorded 249 babies born with the first name Yahshua in the United States. That's more than enough people named Yahshua to occupy the territory of Pitcairn Islands (United Kingdom) with an estimated population of 66 (as of July 1, 2008).
What year were 5 or more babies first named Yahshua? The name was first given to 5 or more babies in the year 1992 when it was given as a first name to 5 new born babies.
What year had the most people named Yahshua born? The highest recorded use of the first name Yahshua was in 2016 with a total of 24 babies.
Random Yahshua Factoid: According to the 2018 U.S. Social Security Administration data, the first name Yahshua is not a popular baby boy's name in Florida. Imagine that, only 6 babies in Florida have the same name in 2018.
Weird things about the name Yahshua: The name spelled backwards is Auhshay. A random rearrangement of the letters in the name (anagram) will give Syuhhaa. How do you pronounce that?
Siah Neutral
Michael Boy
Zion Neutral
Zani Neutral
Sara Girl
Deya Girl
Bathsheba Girl
Zacharie Boy
David Boy
Zed Boy


category deletion does not remove the 'contained' articles.
would i have to go to phpmyadmin to that ??
various ways to do it.
1. give no option, just remove articles from db when delete is confirmed for category.
2. option to delete or not articles in category.
Hmm that's an interesting decision... I've never played around with deleting a category while it had articles assigned to it.. what would be a good idea would be to have an option to either a) delete all articles assigned to the category being deleted or b) re-assign the articvles to a different category.
category was deleted, it does not show in category table.
wasn't the artlicles get new category id ?
May be in theory that id has to cleared (like set category=0), but what is in code should and works as You described, mo Actually, I think that reasonable approach to handle articles on deletion of category would be to un-publish them (set publish=0) to ensure that site's home page isn't flooded with whatever was under category deleted.
For anyone who may come upon this thread wanting a "fix" for lost content after deleting a Category... this has been fixed with a minor modification now assigns "unpublished" status to content associated with a Category that has been deleted. The content remains listed in the Articles View list and can then be edited and re-located to another category from there. These changes were added to the official sNews 1.6 download on July 23.08.
Maybe it's not the right place to ask, but is there a DIFF version of the applied patches?
Cause I really don't want to start modding and altering yet another snews.php file on my installs ... or maybe the patches are too complicated to be applied separately?