A project to upgrade the home of Portland State University's School of Business Administration will include the renovation of more than 100,000 square feet and an addition totaling 38,000 square feet.
General contractor Skanska began work on the project's first phase in August with partial demolition of the building's west side, which formerly housed the university's Graduate School of Education. That portion of the building has been reduced to its structural elements and is being modernized with new HVAC, electrical, plumbing and communications systems, exterior walls and windows.
The business school will relocate into the west side upon completion of renovations in September 2016, allowing the project's second phase to begin with demolition and modernization of the building's east side.
The project's third phase, which is being performed simultaneously with the renovation work, is construction of a 38,000-square-foot building that will connect to the existing building via a five-story, glass-lined atrium with a sloped roof and crisscrossing stairs and bridges.
Upon completion of that building, the business school will have 21 classrooms – three times as many as it has now. The building will also contain 10 project and team rooms, four industry-specific centers, multiple common spaces and study areas, and new offices for faculty and staff.
The $60 million project was designed by SRG Partnership Inc. and German firm Behnisch Architekten. The engineering team includes PAE Consulting Engineers Inc. for mechanical/electrical/plumbing, Catena Consulting Engineers for structural, and KPFF Consulting Engineers for civil. Mayer/Reed is the landscape architect.
The building will open in August 2017 as the Karl Miller Center, named for the grandfather of donor Rick Miller, a PSU alum.
The building's western portion, at right, is currently undergoing renovation while the School of Business Administration occupies the east side. On the north side of the block, have completed excavation and begun pouring footings for the 38,000-square-foot pavilion.
BMWC Constructors employees Curtis Gray, left, a journeyman plumber with Local 290, and Lauron Pope, an apprentice, weld hydronic piping.
A terrace on the third floor of the building's Southwest Broadway-facing side will contain eco-roof features and a glass-paneled pergola for rain protection.
The west side of the structure has been demolished down to its structural elements, and work has begun framing exterior walls on the sixth floor.
Darren Cathcart, Jr., a general foreman with Performance Contracting Inc. and journeyman carpenter with EIS Local 146 cuts steel studs while framing exterior walls.
Framing of exterior walls has begun on the sixth floor.


text:
package org.neverfear.util.messaging;

import java.io.IOException;
import java.nio.ByteBuffer;
import java.nio.channels.SocketChannel;

public final class SocketChannelLengthPrefixedMessageWriter
	extends LengthPrefixedMessageWriter {

	public static final int DEFAULT_SIZE = 1024;

	private final SocketChannel channel;

	public SocketChannelLengthPrefixedMessageWriter(final SocketChannel channel) {
		this(channel,
				DEFAULT_SIZE);
	}

	public SocketChannelLengthPrefixedMessageWriter(final SocketChannel channel, final int size) {
		super(size);
		this.channel = channel;
	}

	@Override
	protected void doWrite(final byte[] message) throws IOException {
		final ByteBuffer buffer = ByteBuffer.wrap(message);
		this.channel.write(buffer);
	}

	@Override
	public void close() throws IOException {
		this.channel.close();
	}
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Q: Java how to create Not clickable Jlist
this image is taken from netbean, the option 1. and 2. is not clickable.
I have the similiar setup in Jlist but when i setenabled(false) the item become grey, i want it remain black color, like what is shown above.

A:
this image is taken from netbean, the option 1. and 2. is not
  clickable. I have the similiar setup in Jlist but when i
  setenabled(false) the item become grey, i want it remain black color,
  like what is shown above.

for disabled JList you can to change key in UIManager.put("Label.disabledForeground", Color.magenta);
EDIT
you can to play with
UIManager.put("List.background", Color.lightGray);
UIManager.put("List.selectionBackground", Color.orange);
UIManager.put("List.selectionForeground", Color.blue);
UIManager.put("Label.disabledForeground", Color.magenta);

or similair methods is possible to override in XxxListCellRenderer too, without set any value to UIManager

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Benchrest Central Forums > Forum Index > General Discussion > Supreme Court - 5-4 In Favor of Individuals
View Full Version : Supreme Court - 5-4 In Favor of Individuals
pendennis
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right, not subject to membership in a militia; that firearms can be owned and used in self-protection, and lawful activities.
jackie schmidt
We need to wait to see the majority opinion so as to see just how far reaching this is.
But at least, the Court has finally answered that age old question concerning the true meaning of the 2d amendment.
What is disturbing is it went 5-4. ......jackie
Ramsh00ter
This is a fantastic day for us!
It will change nothing for now, there will have to be many law suites filed to overturn some of the laws.
What I see as the big gain, is this will make the politicians that promote these anti gun laws will have to think twice about how much money and effort it will take to skate around the 2nd Amendment.
Have no fear, this is not going to stop the anti gunner, but now we have a Supreme Court ruleing behind us.
Boys and girls, mark this day down on your Calendar!
Jackie, my friend, you are so right, it is sad and scary that we are faced with a Supreme Court Justices that are willing to ignore the Constitution in favor of their agenda.
I have already had 3 of my shooting buddies call saying we need to throw a BBQ this weekend, sounds like a good party to me :D
Bill Wynne
Now, the 2 nd amendment reads "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." That is all it means. Good case for using the fewest words when there is a choice. The stuff about the militia was just put in to confuse the confused.
Concho Bill
The court says individuals have right to own guns! craig
WOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :):):):)
"Aim small miss small", :D:D:D:D
Phil Deese
Must own some guns!!! Strike one up for America and one down for the lib's!!!:D:D
Paul Fielder
....as it was pretty clear to me but I am surprised & MAD at how close it was.
I can't believe 4 of them can't read....good day.
If this doesn't scare you into voting for JM, nothing will.
gunmaker
Wait to see how the liberal infested media spins this. I'm sure their opinion of this historic ruling will be as far removed from reality as usual. Desperately trying to still convince us what they think the Second Amendment really means.
BIG DAY!!!!
We should have it declared a national paid holiday for gun owners with the money for paying the holiday coming from special taxes collected from non gun owners.
Remember! We "only" "won" by one vote. This issue "should" have been closer to unanimous.
f d shuster
I'll bet all the Socialist/Marxists are having a hissy fit now. Like rats trying to find their way out of a burning building. Hope none of them make it.;)
koginam
I just read the courts decision and I find the reasons used in the liberal side of the court as reasons to restrict the right covered by the second amendment to be very telling, I recommend you read the whole decision to see why we need to have more conservative judges on the court. The link is above posted by Glenn Chism.
most of the FOR were republican appointee's and most of the AGAINST were democrat appointee's................imagine that!!:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: Do we really want Osama appointing judges??? The "BLACK DEMOCRATIC" mayor of Washington has stated on the news that he was against the ruling and have already thrown a lot of paper work out there to slow the process down!!
Kennedy was the swing vote. The NRA spoke today after the decision, and stated they will file suit in other cities that have infringed on our rights!!
Looks like law abiding citizens will finally be able to defend themselves.;););)
7 of these were appointed by repub potus!!??
Your correct!!! Thomas-George Senior.. Alito-George Junior..Scalia-Reagan..
Kennedy-Reagan..Roberts-George Junior..Stevens-Ford...Souter-George Senior.
2 Democrats..Ginsburg and Breyer-Clinton.
The five that past it were all republican nominees!!
The 4 against...both democrats and 2 republican nominees!!
looks like a sweep for the consevatives FOR a tie for the AGAINST!!
Chisolm
Stevens Ford
Scalia Reagan
Kennedy Reagan
Souter G. H. Bush
Thomas G. H. Bush
Ginsburg Clinton
Breyer Clinton
Roberts G. W. Bush
Alito G. W. Bush
The green ones voted to support the 2nd Ammendment.
The real story here is that the 2nd came within one vote of being ruled nonexistent. And here comes the most liberal president in history.
I agree!!
I heard one dimwit whining that the Supreme Court decided today that the Constitution took precedent over policy decisions because of this decision. It's funny that the left can find "rights" in the Constitution that are non-existant, while not being able to find RIGHTS that are directly written in the document.
The Supreme Court is the most wonderful part of the government when they suit the fancy of the leftists, and the worst when they actually interpret it to mean what it says. Imagine that. :eek:
"...Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons." He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found." ..."
The first 10 amendments were written exactly to limit the actions of the government. I find it very troubling a supreme court justice doesn't recognize this.
Is there any place in the constitution were the government is endowed with a "right"? The government has responisibilities but no rights.
Regards, Ron
So Justice John Paul Stevens, reflecting the opinion of the bare minority, finds it hard to believe that the Framers would make a choice to limit the powers of government??????????!!!!!!!!!!
The entire Bill of Rights is meant to be an enumeration of individual rights an a limitation of governmental power.
Four of the nine believe this? My God, we are lost.
It's patently obvious that the people who don't understand the four dissenters in today's Supreme Court decision never went to law school, but learned to read English. That means that we suffer from the disabilities known as common sense, and understanding. We obviously don't understand that the government should run our lives because elected and appointed officials and bureaucrats are ever so much smarter than the rest of us.
The only hope for us is that the American's With Disabilities Act may some day apply to us. Or that we get a Supreme Court that doesn't care what the EU, Canada, Mexico, or anyone else thinks except for the Constitution's authors. I was always taught that was the job of the Supremes, not making up new laws, inventing new rights, or amending the Constitution to suit their feelings. Obvously not a lot of thought involved in the dissent today. :eek:
This was a good day for us. This is a concrete step down the road to an 75 year old question. Thank you NRA for all of your help.
This calls for a beer
This one is for all the liberals in Illinois and DC that have denied second amendment rights to all of those people for all those years.
YOU LOOSE
For all those people that they subjected to crime without any means of self defense.
For all the third shift people working at a quick mart in the bad part of town
For all the people that worked at a firearms manufacturer and lost their job
For all the single mothers in bad parts of town, who wonder how they are going to keep their children safe when the boogey man comes knocking.
RStiefel
It's great for everyone that our high court has the cajones to finally set things straight. Their ruling does NOT give the third shift people the right to CARRY a firearm, or the single mothers in the bad parts of town the right to shoot someone. Have you ever shot someone in self defense?
This is what happens: You are read your rights, you are charged with assault with a deadly weapon, maybe murder, you are booked into your local jail, you have to retain an attorney and defend your actions. You might even be charged with discharging a firearm in the city limits (depending upon how the powers that be feel). If you happen to win this one after the tens of thousands of dollars you pay in attorneys fees, the Federal laws may apply also.
DR4NRA
If you would like to read the ruling here is the link http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/HellerOpinion.pdf
WE WIN no matter how ya look at it
Have you ever had someone come in to your place of business and demand money?
Have you ever driven on vacation and got lost and had people curse at you because your car was nice and tell you to unlock your doors. With your children in the back seat sleeping??
How about come home and find that you have been robbed and wonder if the criminal is still there.
Well now everyone that has, has had there second amendment verified. If you want to live in a police state its fine with me, but it wont be my state.
I will take my chances with whatever laws come my way, but right now I am happy that we all can defend our families. Have a nice day!
DONE - OT
but my son had to shoot someone in 1999 in one of the most gun friendly states in our country, Arizona. Having said that, I have first hand knowledge about what happens. At no time did I say one should not have the right to defend ones self or family, nor did I say anything about living in a police state.
The justices said we have the right to own handguns, they also said it does NOT give us the right to carry one. That is a right given by each individual state. I happen to live in the the state with the toughest laws. Keep in mind that no matter what your state may say, Federal law will always prevail.
I cannot emphasize enough that the 4 ney sayers are willing to abolish our Constitutional Rights. We must remember this and use it in the Presidential election to tell all why a dem liberal president is DANGEROUS to us!!!
best, nrb
are Republicans. Not all Republicans vote the same way just as not all Democrats vote the same way.
RStiefel, that is not what happens.
I worked a case where a homeowner shot one of the five bangers who entered his house threatening to kill him, his son, the rest of the family, etc. The banger was armed with...no bs...a beer can. He wasn't read his rights, booked into county jail, charged with anything, didn't have to hire an attorney, etc. The only real law enforcement intrusion he had to put up with was me and my co-horts in his house, 24 hours a day, for 4-5 days, armed to the teeth. He was staying up all night, guarding his castle and not sleeping much. We thought he could use some rest. He didn't seem to mind our presence. He did have to show up in court to testify against the banger he shot, though. The banger ended up going to prison for 5 or so years for home invasion (minus about two inches of femur due to a 30-30 slug...and yes, it was a Winchester 94).
Every case is different, every case is unique. There are about a zillion factors that can come into play in lethal force incindent. Two of the biggest are reasonableness, i.e., what would a "reasonable person do/think", and state of mind. I could go on for a while with all this, but I won't. But suffice to say, your doomsdayish prophecy, "this is what will happen" post is incorrect.
What this all boils down to is people trying to force their beliefs on to other people. In this particular case the highest court in the land that we live in has said that the individual American has the right to possess a firearm for lawful use such as self defense.
I dont care what anyone says, you threaten my family or my self so that you jeopardize my ability to provide for them there may be consequences because
THE SECOND AMENDMENT GUARANTEES ME THE RIGHT TO OWN A FIREARM !
6/26/2008 CASE CLOSED
mike in co
I THINK YOU ARE MISSING THE REAL PICTURE.
i have a personal responsibility to protect myself, my family, my property....etc.
i do not need anyones permission to do this.
the framers of our constitution knew this and put it in print.
9 out of 9 of the justices know this, 4 know it but have private protection, so chose a political answer instead.
its amazing to me the number of gun owning nay sayers still own guns ???
if life is so bad and there is no chance to succeed...why are you here ?
The important thing to remember is that this ruling does not apply to STATE laws. The District of Columbia is part of the federal government and the 2nd applies in DC.
I may be wrong on this,but until a court holds that the 2nd is applicable against a State. Cities and states outside of DC/national parks/military bases, etc., are free to do what they wish in terms of regulation. What this ruling does is,open the doors for citizens to challenge individual States regulations that fall within the scope of the SC ruling.
glenn...you got this all wrong.......the constitution, the bill of rights apply to all free citizens, has nothing to do with which state they live in......
it is not about WHERE, ITS ABOUT INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.....everywhere.
states are the true authority within the us of a( not the fed govmnt). they may create and apply rules in thier states, but they cannot conflict with the constitution, nor the bill of rights......which is why the sc heard this case.
speedpro
I'd feel much better if the Supreme Court's vote was unamious in our favor, but it was nice to see my money at work thru the NRA, though still can't figure out why they even sent that "Teddy Roosevelt" folding knife .... :confused:
micad
Actually the stuff about the militia had a very significant purpose. At the time the Constitution was written militia had a very different meaning than we commonly assume today.
The Militia Act of 1792, written, for the most part, by the same guys that wrote the 2nd amendment, defined militia as consisting of ALL able bodied free males over the age of 18.
The men of America were expected to be ready to defend not only hearth and home but the community, state and nation, and to generally provide there own arms to do so.
Mr. D
I'm trying very hard to read your posts and believe you can't possible be like your posts. I'm not sure you needed to call the mayor of D.C. the "BLACK DEMOCRATIC" mayor????? I know you dislike Democrats, but why put BLACK in caps also?? Come on Phil!!
The function of SCOTUS is to do just what it did. Some managed to miss the whole point of the decision. It simply said that "unreasonable regulation" is unconstitutional and attacks the citizen's right to keep and bear arms! Good!
The decision simply did what I predicted. It struck down D.C.'s sweeping, unreasonable ban on guns as it should have, but it did not say that no regulation about gun ownership could exist. It just put the country on notice that "unreasonable regulation" like in D.C. is unconstitutional. Good for them!!
(NOTE WHAT THE DISSENTING OPINION HELD BELOW)
Yet the lead dissent, by Justice John Paul Stevens, did not dispute that the Second Amendment protects an individual right. Rather, he wrote, the question was the "scope of that right," which protected militia service but left additional regulation to the judgment of the legislature. The Second Amendment's drafting history revealed the founders' "concern about the potential threat to state sovereignty that a federal standing army would pose," something that could be checked by state militias, he wrote, joined by Justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.
Scalia does not even believe all gun regulation is unconstitutional.
In a footnote, Justice Scalia noted that the issue known as "incorporation" -- whether federal rights also are binding on state governments -- wasn't before the court, and observed that prior cases "reaffirmed that the Second Amendment applies only to the Federal Government." In a 1997 book, he suggested views even more ominous for gun enthusiasts, writing that "properly understood, [the amendment] is no limitation upon arms control by the states."
My reading of the decision is that the (1.) 2nd Amendment rights apply to individual citizens which the dissenting opinion did not oppose (no change since 1939 decision), and (2.) gun regulation must be "reasonable" or it is unconstitutional. In effect the ruling said that D.C. and like political areas cannot make unreasonable, sweeping anti gun laws which is great news! Don't expect all gun regulation to disappear!
The historical (hysterical) argument:
The main argument has always been as to whether the Founding Fathers referred to the "keeping and bearing of arms" (1.) as including cannon, armories, all weapons of war needed by the militia to protect itself from the newly formed Federal Standing Army, or (2.) It meant to protect the average farmer's right to keep personal arms for hunting and self defense against Indians, etc.
Who could possible believe the Founding Fathers could have even considered that the Federal Government would try to take away hunting rifles in the 1780's? A ridiculous, but a convenient interpretation today! Remember that even at the writing of the 2nd Amendment there were restrictions as to where a firearm could be kept and born. If a group of men had entered the area where the Constitution was being debated with pistols under their coats do you believe that the Founding Fathers would have said, "No problem, that is their right!" Not a chance!
Big Al
Well then if that is Scalia understanding about the Bill of Rights only apply to the Federal Government. THEN HE IS 100% CORRECT! In Fact please everyone take note. This is a D.C. case, Washington D.C. is Federal territory, the ruling can only apply to Federal Territory. In fact all Federal Law only applies to the Territories. My Goodness Mr. D, you have stumbled across what I have been telling people for many years.
You must look to your own State Constitutions for relief. Of course many people have come to believe that we the people are bound by laws written for state government. Many people think that's what being a free people mean, being bound to a piece of paper meant to run a state of federal government. How sad that so many Americans are ignorant of what being free means.
You might have misunderstood my layman description of the SC ruling,and its impact.
Mr D and Big AL got it right. Each State decides how they want to regulate the "right to bear arms."
The new ruling opens the door for individuals to challenge their States gun rights legislature. This can be a long drawn out process and very costly.
Here is a link to what we will be seeing a lot of in the near future.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-supreme-court-gun-banjun27,0,1997533.story
well i guess we agree to disagree on each others "wording".
the constitution and the bill of rights apply to the people, reguardless of where the people live. the individual states have the authority to control how this is done within thier state, AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT CONFLICT WITH THE CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS.
yes we at each state must now insist that our states are not limiting our (recently re afirmed) gun rights.( i think this is where we agree).
this ruling is monumental. never, in the last 200 years, has the supreme court put in print that the wording of the 2nd ammendment means just what it says.
If a group of men had entered the area where the Constitution was being debated with pistols under their coats do you believe that the Founding Fathers would have said, "No problem, that is their right!" Not a chance!
I would be extremely surprised to find that some of those very men did not do that very thing. As I sincerely doubt that they were all unarmed - even at the signing.
As a matter of historical fact that many of the congress men went armed in the house and senate. The historical record is full of examples. Do we need to be reminded that these men were passionate about their views on freedom?
I'm afraid your misunderstanding of the Federal Constitution is incorrect. The amendments to the Constitution is a prohibition on the Federal government in the Territories not to do infringe on these rights. "The Government did not give you these rights" These right were given to you by GOD! Each State or common wealth had to agree before they became a state to agree with the Federal Constitution, there Constitutions had to be in compliance before they were allowed to join the Union of States, as Territories.
These rights were and our common to all men that are free. If a government grants rights to men, then theses men are not free. It is truly simple to understand. Ask yourself this one question? Why did Men, in America say and think of themselves as KINGS? Because when they believed themselves to be KINGS, they knew that KINGS were granted to be KINGS, by GOD. They had no sovereign earthly Man that ruled over them.
xs hedspace
I see that the mayor of Chicago is already whining that this will "not help law enforcement". Hey, wake up, idiot!! None of the Bill of Rights were put there to make it easier for law enforcement. They are there to make it easier for the common citizen. How inconvenient is the Fifth Amendment to law enforcement! Tough crap, Mayor!:D
Today I was presented with the best argument against the mlitia idea I had ever herd.
My friend Tim said, back when the constitution was written, they could not have meant that the militias were the only ones that could possess firearms because people used guns to feed their families.
But it does not matter now anyway:D
In fact all Federal Law only applies to the Territories. My Goodness Mr. D, you have stumbled across what I have been telling people for many years.
Where did you get the idea that Federal law only applies to federal territories and not states???? Break a federal law in the middle of the state you live in and you'll get to unlearn a few things in a federal prison! No state or territory may violate those rights enumerated in the U.S. Constitution.
Mr. D, it seems some posters, (and probably a lot of citizens), need a simple Civics Lesson.
County law trumps city law
State Law trumps County Law
Federal Law trumps State Law.
The Constitution trumps everything. Period.
The reason people get confused is there are laws that the certain Govenments do not enact,. For instance, Murder, (unless there are provisions set forth in a particular statute), is the States responsibility. The only time The Federal Government gets involved in such cases is through the Presidential Pardon proccess, or through the Courts looking at Constitutional violations.
If ANY government agency, whether it be City, County, State, or Federal, passes a law the is declared contrary to The Constitution, then that law can not stand, and is emmediatly null and void.
Of course, it is up to the Supreme Court to determine what laws are, and are not, Constitutional. That is what they just did with the Washington DC Handgun Ban case.......jackie
The Articles of Confederation and Constitution for the United States of America grant the Congress of the United States power to establish certain courts and to create others by legislation.
The Constitution for the United States of America became effective when if was ratified by nine States on June 21, 1788. Congress enacted the first law on June 1, 1789 when eleven States had ratified the Constitution. The law passed by Congress and signed by the President of the United States was a law establishing an oath for the territorial government.
We know the oath was a territorial oath because it read: "I will support the Constitution of the United States." The territorial President signed the legislation as required by Article I Section 7 Clause 2:
Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it becomes a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it.
The territorial status of all the federal courts is confirmed when the Judiciary Act of 1789 is examined. Section 2 divides the United States into thirteen districts:
SEC . 2. And be it further enacted, That the United States shall be, and they hereby are divided into thirteen districts, to be limited and called as follows, to wit: one to consist of that part of the State of Massachusetts which lies easterly of the State of New Hampshire, and to be called Maine District;
The date of enactment of the Judiciary Act of 1789 is September 24, 1789. The two districts which are not yet States are Kentucky and Maine. Kentucky is admitted to the Union on June 1, 1791 and Maine is admitted on March 15, 1820.
The Judiciary Act of 1789 is legislation, therefore, all the courts created by legislation are territorial courts since Congress has no legislative power outside federal territory.
All the federal courts are territorial and limited to the federal government and federal territory. This includes the U.S. Supreme Court and certainly all the United States district courts.
Do you need more help? Understanding the nature of jurisdiction is not hard to understand, but it does require that you read the material. This material is put out by the U.S. Government.
A good example would be a memory of where the Feds took Timothy McVeigh to charge him with a Federal crime in Oklahoma. They had to take him to Federal Territory to make the charges. They took him to a military base. This is by law Federal territory. This Federal Territory has not change in scope since 1947 as can be seen in title 28 U.S.C. Within ever state Federal Territory lies, Military bases, National Parks, Land for Federal Court houses. This is often mistakenly thought to be the Geographical boundaries of the U.S., nothing could be further from the truth. I challenge anyone to show me in law that I'm wrong. Your assumption means nothing to me. Show me in law that I'm wrong. I long ago gave up on what I think I know, for what I can prove in law. It makes not one wit of difference to me of what you think you know, prove me wrong!
want to rethink your response. Do you know what a Federal Enclave is? You break a law on a Federal Enclave, and you go to court in the District (federal) court in the county in which it took place. For instance: you break a law at Camp Pendleton and you go to court in San Diego because it is located in San Diego county. McVeigh was moved to a military installation for fear he would be killed elsewhere. He probably would have been.
Have it your way, don't bother to read the statutes, just keep up with the WAG's you'll do well. "Let the blind lead the blind" It is so much more simple than reading law.
Thank goodness the justices know how to read the law.
Why do you think Scalia wrote what he did, as Mr. D passed along? Was he confused as others here seem to be?
I have long said that most American have no clue of what it means to be free.
They clamor for "RULERS" over them.
The state run schools and the media have done a wonderful job on insuring a dumbed down America.
Does history of America, scare you my fellow Americans?
Perhaps some more reading will help, read The Northwest Ordinance, does the date of 1787 hold any significance for any of you?
You got it right! Good to hear it from a conservative. You know how we liberals lie! :eek: :eek:
There is nothing monumental about the decision at all, very predictable as you will see it came out as I predicted the decision way back without a crystal ball.
(1.) It reaffirms the current interpretation of the 2nd Amendment refers to both militia and individual citizen rights since 1939. (No Change)
(2.) It says the local governments have the right to create regulation related to firearms but they must be "reasonable"! (No change!)
(3.) It rule that the D.C. laws were overly sweeping and unreasonable and therefore were against the 2nd Amendment. (Change)
It now gives support for overly sweeping and unreasonable gun regulation to be challenged based on this ruling. Political areas must now clearly meet a "reasonableness" standard rather that just vote in any law they like. A very good thing for liberals and conservatives alike!!
Even Scalia believes local political areas can make their own gun regulations as long as they meet that standard.
Here's why it was monumental (copy/pasted from another site)
The initial impact [of Heller] is tiny — two DC laws will have to be modified. The ruling as it stands has no impact on any other city or state. But it was a TREMENDOUS ruling nonetheless. The Supreme Court has NEVER said anything substantial about what the Second Amendment means. They have finally spoken and settled many arguments.
* It protects an INDIVIDUAL right unconnected to service in a militia.
* It is a right to personal self-defense, that also happens to enable the militia. It is not a 'hunting and sportsman's' right.
* It is a right that pre-existed the Constitution, not one created by the Constitution.
* That right is entitled to at least some degree of protection (to be determined at a later date).
Even if the initial impact is tiny, this ruling is groundbreaking. This is the 'Roe v. Wade' of gun rights. The details will have to be fleshed out by future courts and future rulings, but the overall right is established.
Prior to today, there were many who argued that there was no individual right and that guns could be outright banned. After today, the right has been established, and now the long process of defining the limitations on that right begin.
None of our rights are considered absolute by the courts; they all withstand some level of restriction. Now the right to bear arms has been elevated to that position."
...and all that is to say nothing about the further veracity it gives the ENTIRE bill of rights.
....in regards to this being monumental in short order. NRA has already started stirring the pot in San Francisco in regards to their gun ban!! This is going to be great. The anti's heads must be spinning right now:-)
Loving it!!
Actually it was rather clear that they did NOT address this issue. Had they been asked to rule on this, one would think, previous precident would have come into play. I found this post itemizing these previous decisions and copy it below.
The Supreme Court has been down the licensing road before:
Murdoch v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 (1943) (cannot be compelled to pay a tax in order to exercise a right)
Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) (waiting period for welfare check is void as it touches upon fundamental right of interstate travel)
Thomas v. Collins, 323 U.S. 516, 538-40 (1945) (registration to exercise a right is unconstitutional)
United States v. Jackson, 390 U.S. 570, 581 (1968) (government cannot chill exercise of fundamental right)
Minnepolis Star v. Minnesota Commn'r of Rev., 460 U.S. 575 (1983) (taxes on fundamental are unconstitutional)
Licensing, taxes and waiting periods are not reasonable restrictions on fundamental, individual rights as licensing, taxes and waiting periods are unconstitutional when it involves one's rights.
Using Miller as the source of the "Miller test" of 2nd Amendment items covered - along with the missing evidence in Miller pertaining to those weapons "of use to the militia" as well as the aforementioned cases. And most of the objectionable firearms infringements would fall.
The only reason I mentioned those two is because they are absolute. Regardless of what crime a citizen of any State is convicted, the President can issue him a full and free pardon, based on nothing more than his desire to. There is no appeal to a Presidential Pardon, as it is a Constitutional Duty.
Of course, if a President did show utter irresponsibility in a Pardon, the Congress does have the power to bring articles of impeachment. That is the check on the Presidents power to pardon.
The other, "violations of the Constitution", are also absolute. Once the Supreme Court does issue a ruling that a certain statute is Unconstitutional, then there is no appeal. That Stands.
However, if the court does go too far, The people, through their Legislators and the proccess spelled out in The Constitution, can Amend the Constitution. If something is part of the Constitution, then it cannot be declared "Unconstitutional"
Of course, if the Legislature tires of Supreme Court Justices monkeying around with laws that they pass, then they can always bring articles of impeachment against them.
That is the check..........jackie
The NRA is running behind the efforts of the SAF and Hellers lawyer in challenging Chicagos laws.
A simple definition search of FEDERAL ENCLAVE would help you to understand what Congress has the power to do. Every Piece of Federal land, National forest, Military installation, etc. etc. etc. is in FACT a Federal Enclave. This includes the District of Columbia.
RayfromTX
The opinion that the 2nd confirms an individual right to bear arms was actually unanimous because even the dissenting opinion recognized the individual right. The dissenters were just fearful of the domino effect to striking down a gun control law in a crime ridden urban area.
I guess that is somewhat hopeful. I would have preferred a 7-2 decision. Hey, I'm not greedy.
I believe that any crime commited with a deadly weapon, such as a Firearm, should automatically be bumped to "Capitol" status.
That way, when some thug decides to stick agun in someone's face and demand money, he just made himself eligable for the Death Penalty.
Another thing that also confuses me is the concept of charging someone with "attempted murder", if the victim survives. If you intentions were to point a firearm at some one and shoot them, it should be the same whether you were a bad shot, or not.
We need to reward law abiding citizens, and make penalties for criminals even more severe.........jackie
Wrong, all this is the same as the 1939 SCOTUS decision! All this decision did is to say that regulations as in D.C. must be reasonable or they are unconstitutional! It does have the effect of being a precedent telling cities and states that gun regulation is permittable, but it must be reasonable as D.C.'s was not! Good, but hardly ground breaking! Not even the most conservative Scalia believes that localities cannot create gun regulation. The cities the founding fathers lived in had gun regulations while they lived there! The only remaining argument that creates a split in the Supreme Court is that some members still maintain that the language of the 2nd Amendment and the historical context does not support that the Founding Fathers were speaking about Farmer Browns Deer rifle or shotgun! The 2nd Amendment was required by those Founding Fathers who feared the new federal government might try to disband the local militias and confiscate their armories, canons and weaponry as a means of increasing federal power. The greatly feared a federal standing armed forces which was a new thing due to the Rev. War. Even if you watched HBO's John Adams it explored what a big issue it was for them to dare to establish a federal army that could become the tool of a King like president! Even the word "bear" arms had a military context in those days. It didn't mean walking through a field with a shotgun, It meant using them against an enemy or your own government!
You can't logically take the words of the Constitution out of historical context just because it is convenient for our mutual goal of protecting our right to keep firearms in 2008. It's too bad we can't vote in another Amendment that makes it 100% clear, but it would be a close vote today with all the crime shown on TV!
Wrong, all this is the same as the 1939 SCOTUS decision! All this decision did is to say that regulations as in D.C. must be reasonable or they are unconstitutional! It does have the effect of being a precedent telling cities and states that gun regulation is permittable, but it must be reasonable as D.C.'s was not!
Well, no, not quite. The Miller case was distinctly one sided, this one was not.
The opinion deliberately avoided the subject of regulations and mearly noted that the plaintif was not contesting "reasonable" regulation.
Precedent is in effect on licensing of a Right though.
Consider previous SCOTUS rulings.
(Stole this post from another board)
Vibe,
I read your post, but I don't get how it disagrees with my quote you listed? "All this decision did is to say that regulations as in D.C. must be reasonable or they are unconstitutional! It does have the effect of being a precedent telling cities and states that gun regulation is permittable, but it must be reasonable as D.C.'s was not!"
I agree it is usually a logical error to start with the word "All"! I should have said, (The main thing this decision did is to say that regulations as in D.C. must be reasonable or they are unconstitutional! It does have the effect of being a precedent telling cities and states that gun regulation is permittable, but it must be reasonable as D.C.'s was not!")
So what am I missing? In what way was my quote inaccurate? Educate me as to your point.
We can all get caught up in the semantics of what law meant what back when, and what the founding Fathers intended, originol intent, the Federal Papers, Jeffersonian writings, and all other things that have ONE THING IN COMMON. They are NOT the law of the land.
I even hear callers on talk radio quote the Declaration of Independece as a basis for legal standing. But the fact is, the Declaration has no status what so ever as a legal document.
Whether we like it or not, the law of the land is what the Congress, the President, and finally the Supreme court says it is. It can, and does change through time. But, we are very fortunate that our Founding Fathers made the Constitution so difficult to change so that it is not subject to the petty whims of Polititians and the Public.
I consider the Bill of Rights a sacred document. Not sacred as in religion, but sacred in that it is one of the few times where the rights of the People are the first consideration in Government. It might not seem that way at times, but the Document has stood the test of time, and the test of men.
So,when is this Court going to finally take a look at the 10th Amendment. Heck, it does't even have an argueable clause such as was contained in the 2d Amendment, (the militia thing). It says that unless it is specifically spelled out in the Constitution, it is the business of the States and the People, NOT the Federal Government..........jackie
I read your post, but I don't get how it disagrees with my quote you listed? "All this decision did is to say that regulations as in D.C. must be reasonable or they are unconstitutional!
Well, because, as Scallia wrote in the majority decision, the question of regulation was NOT addresssed. At all. So this decision actually says nothing about regulation "reasonable" or other wise - only that prohibition is unconstitutional.
If so, I see no difference in meaning than what I said. He may have said it does not address regulation to be political, but the logical conclusion must be that regulation must be reasonable and not simply a broad prohibition without cause which is unconstitutional. Example: If you pass a regulation that no one in D.C. may possess a firearm that is an unconstitutional prohibition. If the regulation states felons may not possess a firearm it is a reasonable regulation and therefore not a unconstitutional prohibition.
Are we on the same page??
Not sure. Prohibiting felons from owning or possessing firearms is more a regulation of the felon than the firearm. That exemption is well established. Regulation of the conditions under which a discharge of the firearm (or threat of discharge) is acceptable is one area not covered, and might be appropriate - but what part of "Shall not be infringed" would indicate that an "Except under these circumstances" would be constitutional against the actions of keeping and or carrying?
Your quibbling Vibe!
"Except under these circumstances" is a regulation! You regulate "the felon" may not possess a firearm, not the inanimate object of the firearm. You can't put the firearm in prison!
I can own my hand guns, but I can be reasonable regulated not to conceal them in public without a permit!
I think we're on the same page! Just pretend I'm not a liberal! :D
Well yes, yes I am. When discussing with a liberal one has to do so. Else the meaning WILL get twisted to their advantage and no longer represent reality. :D
"Except under these circumstances" is a regulation!
Which is why it's not constitutional to do so.
You regulate "the felon" may not possess a firearm, not the inanimate object of the firearm. You can't put the firearm in prison!
you could put the firearm in prison, but it would of course not have the same effect. :D
and yet I disagree.
I could "pretend" I were on Mars, but the reality of there being flora and fauna about would rapidly convince me otherwise. :D
Chris Mathews asked Wayne Lappier of the NRA how many NRA Members would be included in the National Crime Statistics. Of course, he already knew the answer. It is so few, that it does not even register.
Thank God for the NRA. They are forced to be radical, and vigilant, because the anti-gun foes are.
I you are not an NRA Member, you need to be.........jackie
cntryboy1289
I go back to the original, shall not be infringed to ask what about this is not painlfully clear, congress shall pass no laws to infringe upon the right to bear arms. If you want to include service in militias as incumbant to this amendment, where do you think militias draw from? That's right, from us and if you regulate us from having the means and weapons necessary to defend our country, state, city and our house, then you have violated the second amendment which is what the writers of the Constitution intended not to happen. This is directly intended to lessen our authority when it comes to defending our rights.
I say that has already taken place since we can no longer own all weapons of war unless we apply for and pay the taxes to do so. That in itself violates the second amendment. Now can anyone tell me where it says congress has to right to regulate our rights according to their whim?
This occurred because the states decided to allow the Federal government to make this decision because they didn't want to make a decision or be in charge of our rights anymore. This goes back to drugs as well as firearms when the states were weak and gave away their authority to the Fed and should never have been allowed. Since then we have to apply for a license to own automatic weapons which is in direct conflict with the second amendment, but we have allowed it to go on since the 30's.
When are we going to take back our rights????
It's sad, but anytime some stands-up for what is right they get labeled as radical, extremist, racist, or mean spirited. We do need to commend Mr. Heller for his stand. He has just become famous for not compromising on his beliefs.......his name will be forever used anytime the second amendment is discussed in this country. If we all had the fortitude to make a stand for what we believe in the muslims, the race baiters, the ACLU and many other corrupt organizations would be irrelevant in our society!!
But the majority of (at least this group) people don't have enough will to make a stand. My post about cutting fuel consumption is a very good example. Like I said there, there is a large group complaining, but no one willing to stand up and help change it. Look what that single security guard did virtually by himself regarding the 2nd amendment. Imagine what WE could accomplish if WE ALL stood our ground to force a change!!!!!
Vibr,
I like your sense of humor! At least we have that in common! :D
You're off the deep end again! Who with half a brain that we care about called Mr. Heller "radical, extremist, racist, or mean spirited"? As a terrible, idiotic liberal I salute him! Cool your jets!
I am a member of the NRA! I am also a member of my local private shooting range that hosts Benchrest Matches, as well as just about every other type of shooting competition. There are only two liberals that are members and I am both of them, but the range you could mistake me for a regular human being! I just come to test handloads, etc. I save my politics for you guy that can't shoot me! All the guys like Phil are carrying guns!
I only get liberal when someone at a meeting attacks a person they suspect might not be good enough to be a member because they are not ultra conservative wearing I love Reagan buttons. The president challenged a criminal attorney to declare if he was a prosecutor or a defense attorney! Until we have to wear NAZI armbands or join the Taliban that's not going to get past me in America! Other than that, I keep my mouth shut at the range! Really! No really I do! No, I do really! I meant like really I do!
Oh, never mind! :D :D
Flash The Cash
...the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose...--Judge Activist Antonin Scalia in Heller v. D. C.
Scalia gutted the Second Amendment. I don't see that as something to cheer about.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Kultguy's Keep
Cult, classic and crazy movies you must see, might see and maybe miss
Cult Reads & Ephemera
A Celebration of Peter Cushing
Who is Kultguy?
Category Archives: Thriller
Killer Party | It's the event to die for!
Posted by Peter Fuller
When teenage thieves Caspar (Sam Strike), Iris (Virginia Gardner) and Dodge (Brandon Micheal Hall) infiltrate a mansion dinner party, they have plans for pulling off an easy heist. Little do they know that the dinner party is actually being hosted by for a group of recovering serial killers. Once the mansion owners realise they are about to be robbed, all hell breaks loose…
Each of our would-be thieves have their reasons for attempting one last heist to ensure a better life, but not even the best of intentions will save them from the party's killer line-up. John Wick regular Lance Reddick carries a remarkable gravitas as the 'recovering' murderers' de facto leader, YouTuber-turned-actor Kian Lawley's cranks up a disturbing turn as the sleazy son, and Charmed's Julian McMahon has a whole lot of scenery-chewing fun as the family patriarch.
From the energetic camerawork and music to some imaginative feats of bloody ultra violence and the lashings of black humour, Killer Party is an event to die for!
Out on DVD and Blu-ray 27 May 2019 from Altitude Film Entertainment
Posted in American Indie, Horror, Might See, Thriller
Tags: Altitude Film Entertainment, Blu-ray, DVD, Julian McMahon, Kian Lawley, Killer Party, Lance Reddick
Demonlover | Olivier Assayas' neo-noir/cyber thriller unleashed on Blu-ray
Twenty years after David Cronenberg prophesied the dark side of the Internet age in Videodrome, acclaimed French filmmaker Olivier Assayas (Irma Vep) updated it for the New Millennium in his startlingly prescient 2002 thriller Demonlover, a chilling exploration of the nexus between sex and violence available at the click of a button.
Up-and-coming executive Diane (Connie Nielsen) lets nothing stand in her way when it comes to landing the lucrative Tokyo Anime contract for the Volf Corporation, guaranteeing worldwide exclusive rights to the latest in cutting-edge hentai.
Despised by her assistant (Chloë Sevigny) and engaged in a risky game of corporate espionage, her ruthless ambition meets its match in Elaine (Gina Gershon), the charismatic representative of an American Internet porn company called Demonlover.
However, the company is only the front for an online portal to the Hellfire Club, which gives its users control over the next big thing in interactive extreme pornography: real women, tortured according to subscribers' whims, in real time.
Diane wants a piece of the action, and will stop at nothing to get it; but as she delves deeper into the twisted world of the Hellfire Club, reality slips away and the stakes of the game are raised to the point of no return.
Armed with a pounding score by Sonic Youth, Assayas' neo-noir/cyber horror is finally unleashed for the first time on Blu-ray from Arrow Academy, with revealing extras and a new director-approved restoration.
BLU-RAY SPECIAL EDITION CONTENTS
• Brand new 2K restoration of the 121-minute director's cut, approved by Olivier Assayas
• High Definition Blu-Ray (1080p) presentation
• Original 5.1 DTS-HD master audio
• Optional English subtitles for the deaf and hard-of-hearing
• Audio commentary by writer/director Olivier Assayas
• New visual essay written and narrated by critic Jonathan Romney
• Peripherie de Demonlover: Behind-the-scenes documentary directed by Yorick Le Saux
• Archive interviews with Olivier Assayas, Connie Nielsen, Chloë Sevigny and Charles Berling
• SY NYC 12/12/01: The Demonlover Sessions: a fly-on-the-wall documentary about the recording of the music score by Sonic Youth
• Q&A with Olivier Assayas filmed at the Wexner Center for the Arts in 2003
• Extended version of the Hellfire Club sequence
• Original theatrical trailers
• Reversible sleeve featuring original and newly commissioned artwork by Chris Malbon
• FIRST PRESSING ONLY: Illustrated collector's booklet featuring new writing on the film by Anne Billson
Posted in Horror, Might See, Thriller, World Cinema
Tags: ARROW ACADEMY, Blu-ray, Chloë Sevigny, Connie Nielsen, Demonlover, French thriller, Olivier Assayas
The Night of the Generals | The World War Two whodunnit on Blu-ray
From Eureka Entertainment comes the World War Two thriller, The Night of the Generals, on Blu-ray for the first time in the UK, taken from a brand new 4K restoration, as part of the Eureka Classics range.
In 1942 Warsaw, a prostitute is found brutally murdered. Normally, the crime would attract little attention in war, but evidence points to one of three top Nazi generals as the killer. Thanks to German Military Intelligence officer, Major Grau, an epic man-hunt begins, through to Nazi-occupied Paris where, in 1944, an almost exact replica of the crime is committed…
This epic 1967 film, adapted from Joseph Kessel's novel and directed by Anatole Litvak (making his penultimate picture), has a cast to die for! Not only do you have Peter O'Toole, Donald Pleasence and Charles Gray playing the prime suspects, you've got Omar Sharif (as Grau), Tom Courtenay, Christopher Plummer, Gordon Jackson, Coral Browne and many more. Even Juliette Greco gets in a little song.
More whodunnit than full-on war drama (with a Hitler assassination subplot that, frankly, seems a bit of an add-on), it also features a magnificent score from Maurice Jarre and evocative film location camerawork, alongside Litvak's carefully calculated direction.
The highlight for me, however, was seeing Gray and Browne sparring as the devoted von Seidlitz-Gabler couple – as they would play similar roles on the London stage in 1975 in Jean Anouilh's Ardèle alongside Browne's hubby, Vincent Price. But O'Toole really is also totally captivating – even though he looks rather pale, sweaty and ill throughout most of the proceedings.
• 1080p presentation on Blu-ray, taken from a stunning 4K restoration
• Uncompressed LPCM audio (original mono presentation)
• Optional English subtitles
• Brand new and exclusive Audio Commentary by author Scott Harrison
• Original Theatrical Trailer
• Collector's booklet featuring new writing by author Scott Harrison
Posted in British Film, Must See, Thriller
Tags: Anatole Litvak, Blu-ray, Eureka Entertainment, Eureka! Classics, Peter O'Toole, The Night of the Generals
The Woman in the Window | Fritz Lang's influential 1940s film noir on Blu-ray
From Eureka Entertainment comes Fritz Lang's The Woman in the Window (1944), starring Edward G Robinson and Joan Bennett, as part of The Masters of Cinema Series for the first time on Blu-ray in the UK.
Robinson plays Richard Wanley, a psychiatrist biding his time while his wife and children are on vacation when he encounters Alice (Joan Bennett), who bears an uncanny resemblance to the subject of a portrait he is fascinated by. When Richard and Alice retire to her home, her wealthy, jealous boyfriend intrudes, and is killed after a struggle.
Alice convinces Richard to cover up the crime, but as Richard's district attorney friend (Raymond Massey) investigates and the boyfriend's bodyguard (Dan Duryea) begins to apply pressure to Richard, the walls begin to close in…
The Woman in the Window is a fantastic thriller made by Fritz Lang at the end of a very profitable decade in Hollywood, years which had already yielded Fury, You Only Live Twice, The Return of Frank James and Hangmen Also Die.
Considered as one of the most important examples of the genre, it was a triumph for Lang, writer/producer Nunnally Johnson (The Grapes of Wrath), and Edward G Robinson, and remains a classic nail-biter.
Bennett is in top form as the slinky femme fatale, while Duryea is at his silkily treacherous best as the blackmailer. Bennett and Duryea re-teamed with Robinson and Lang the following year for the equally exciting Scarlet Street.
Available to order from: Amazon
• 1080p presentation on Blu-ray
• LPCM audio (original mono presentation)
• Video essay by critic David Cairns
• Audio Commentary by Film Historian Imogen Sara Smith, author of In Lonely Places: Film Noir Beyond the City
• Collector's booklet featuring new essays; alongside rare archival imagery
Posted in Film noir, Must-See, Thriller
Tags: Blu-ray, Edward G Robinson, Eureka Entertainment, Joan Bennett, The Masters of Cinema Series, The Woman in the Window
The Big Clock | John Farrow's superior 1940's noir heads to Blu-ray
Screwball comedy and heady thrills collide in director John Farrow's superior noir suspenser, The Big Clock (1948), adapted from the classic 1946 Kenneth Fearing novel of the same name.
Overworked true crime editor George Stroud (Ray Milland) has been planning a vacation for months. However, when his boss, the tyrannical Earl Janoth (Charles Laughton), insists he skips his holidays, Stroud resigns before embarking on a drunken night out with his boss' mistress, Pauline York (Rita Johnson). When Janoth kills Pauline in a fit of rage, Stroud finds himself becoming the prime suspect in her murder…
Charles Laughton may steal the limelight here, but Elsa Lanchester (aka Mrs Laughton) is a real gem as the zany painter with a string of ex-husbands. Ray Milland and Maureen O'Sullivan (aka Mrs Farrow) are also good as the hero and heroine, and George Macready is super hissable as usual. Farrow tops off his terrific vintage thriller with an exciting chase climax.
The Arrow Academy Blu-ray edition of The Big Clock is out on 13 May 2019
• High Definition Blu-ray (1080p) presentation transferred from original film elements
• Uncompressed Mono 1.0 PCM audio soundtrack
• Optional English subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing
• New audio commentary by film scholar Adrian Martin
• Turning Back the Clock: analysis of the film by Adrian Wootton
• A Difficult Actor: an appreciation of Charles Laughton by Simon Callow
• 1948 radio dramatisation by the Lux Radio Theatre, starring Ray Milland
• Reversible sleeve featuring two original artwork options
Posted in Must See, Thriller
Tags: ARROW ACADEMY, Blu-ray, Charles Laughton, Ray Milland, The Big Clock
The Haunted House of Horror | Fancy a seance and an orgy with Frankie Avalon? Well you've got the wrong address!
At a 'swinging' London party, a group of bored teenagers decide they want a new 'experience', so Richard (Julian Barnes) suggests they head to a deserted mansion where an infamous murder took place. But during their 'ghost hunt', one of their number ends up brutally stabbed to death. Hiding the body, the gang decide not to tell the police, which turns out to be a really bad move. As guilt gets the better of them, they decide the only solution is to return to the scene of the crime…
Oh dear! This dated 1960s Tigon/AIP horror is embarrassingly bad, yet bizarrely enjoyable for its kitsch value. Beach Party's Frankie Avalon swaps his shorts and surfboard for some Carnaby Street clobber as the jaded group's nominal leader. But he looks way older than his character should be, and practically dials in his performance. But he's certainly not as stiff as Dennis Price (a last minute replacement for an ailing Boris Karloff), whose police inspector does little more than take phone calls. Among the dolly birds and male model supporting cast are future sitcom stars Richard O'Sullivan and Robin Stewart, pop singer Mark Wynter, and actress Jill Haworth (who ended up in Tower of Evil and The Mutations).
For fans of vintage British horror, you either love or hate this deeply-flawed attempt by Tigon to craft what is probably the UK's first teen slasher, and its production history is certainly way more interesting than the film itself. Originally called The Dark, it was based on an original screenplay by 23-year-old Michael Armstrong, who also got to direct until he was removed by Tigon's AIP co-producers, who demanded cuts, script changes and reshoots, to the point that the finished product looked nothing like what Armstrong had originally intended (he want to make a satire on the youth scene). Hence why George Sewell's scenes look like they come from another movie. They were added to make up the running time after big cuts were made, which got rid of a homosexual subplot and other more interesting elements.
The restoration, however, is impressive as it really highlights the effective camerawork and lighting, particularly so in the mansion scenes (shot on location at the Birkdale Palace Hotel in Southport, but using sets constructed to look battered and aged). There's so much more detail now and the colours really pop (especially in the cast's trendy attire). Check out the clip below about the restoration work (But BIG spoiler alert! The killer is revealed).
While the film ended up generating good returns (especially when it was released in the US as Horror House on a double-bill with Crimson Cult – aka Curse of the Crimson Cult) it's a real pity its a dog's dinner of a thriller. But one can only imagine how it could have turned out had Armstrong had achieved his original concept with his dream cast of David Bowie, Scott Walker, Ian Ogilvy and Jane Merrow. If you want to read Armstrong's original screenplay for The Dark, you purchase it from Paper Dragon Productions for £13.99. Just click on the link.
The Haunted House of Horror is available on Blu-ray in the UK from Screenbound
• Commentary and a new interview with director Michael Armstrong
• Interview clips with Michael Armstrong, actors Mark Wynter, Carol Dilworth and Veronica Doran; plus hair stylist Ross Carver, camera operator James Devis, production secretary Jeanette Ferber, dubbing editor Howard Lanning and editor Peter Pitt.
Posted in British Film, Horror, Might See, Might See, Thriller, Tigon
Tags: Blu-ray, Frankie Avalon, Michael Armstrong, Screebound, The Haunted House of Horror
The Iguana with the Tongue of Fire (1971) | Riccardo Freda's luridly over-the-top giallo
Talky and torturous, with a totally nonsensical plot, Riccardo Freda's The Iguana with the Tongue of Fire (aka L'iguana dalla lingua di fuoco) is one of several 'animal-in-the-title' giallo cash-ins released in the wake of Dario Argento's The Bird with the Crystal Plumage and now heads to Blu-ray courtesy of Arrow Video.
Set in Dublin, it opens with an acid-throwing, razor-wielding maniac viciously slaying a young woman. When the victim's butchered corpse is discovered in a limo owned by Ambassador Sobiesky (Anton Diffring), a police investigation is launched.
It turns out the murdered woman was the Ambassador's lover, but Sobiesky refuses to cooperate with the police, claiming diplomatic immunity.
Troubled ex-cop, John Norton (Luigi Pistilli), is then brought in to assist, but as he starts up an affair with the Ambassador's step-daughter, Helen (Dagmar Lassander), his own family are soon placed in danger as the maniac continues their killing spree…
Now I'm not sure whether director Riccardo Freda was just having an off-day when he was making this or whether he decided to say 'to hell with it', let's play fast and furious with giallo convention and spoof the genre, but Iguana is a confusing mess of a film.
Shot with a tourists eye on Dublin's iconic O'Connell Street and around the Cliffs of Moher in County Clare (acrophobiacs beware), and featuring overblown (vocal) performances from the likes of Valentina Cortese (who plays Sobiesky's glamourous wife as if she were Gloria Swanson's Norma Desmond), plus a rousing score by Stelvio Cipriani, Freda's luridly over-the-top murder mystery is, bizarrely, also quite mesmerising.
I just got carried away by the visuals, the score and the rather disturbing death scenes. I particularly loved how Cipriani introduced crashing instrumental sounds every time there was a close-up of a pair of glasses or a cigarette lighter. Intentional or not, it's quite hilarious in a Garth Marenghi kind of way – as is the explanation as to the film's title (you have to hear it to believe it during a scene between Norton and a shrink).
Now, you can experience Iguana yourself with Arrow Video's new Blu-ray release, which features some excellent extras. My personal favourite was Lovely Jon's featurette on Cipriani, which has spurred me in tracking down the composer's other scores (there's quite a few) iincluding this film's score which Arrow are releasing on purple vinyl; while I had to laugh that even academic Richard Dyer found the film as messed up as I did.
• New 2K restoration from the original 35mm camera negative
• Uncompressed mono 1.0 LPCM audio
• Original English and Italian soundtracks, titles and credits
• Newly translated English subtitles for the Italian soundtrack
• Optional English subtitles for the English soundtrack
• New audio commentary by giallo connoisseurs Adrian J Smith and David Flint
• Of Chameleons and Iguanas: video appreciation by the cultural critic Richard Dyer
• Considering Cipriani: appreciation of composer Stelvio Cipriani by DJ and soundtrack collector Lovely Jon
• The Cutting Game: new interview with Iguana's assistant editor Bruno Micheli
• The Red Queen of Hearts: interview with the actress Dagmar Lassander
• Original Italian and international theatrical trailers
• Image gallery
• Reversible sleeve featuring newly commissioned artwork by Graham Humphreys
• Collector's booklet (First pressing only)
Posted in Giallo, Might-See, Thriller
Tags: Anton Diffring, Arrow Video, Dagmar Lassander, Riccardo Freda, Stelvio Cipriani, The Iguana with the Tongue of Fire
Class of 1984 & Class of 1999 | Mark L Lester's cult high school thrillers make an explosive return – on Blu-ray
From 101 Films and Lionsgate UK comes a double-bill of high school trouble with the Limited Edition Blu-ray releases of Mark L Lester's futuristic high school thrillers, Class of 1984 and Class of 1999.
Idealistic music teacher Andy Norris (Perry King) moves to the inner city with his pregnant wife Diane (Merrie Lynn Ross) and is shocked to find his new school is plagued by drugs and violence. Refusing to turn a blind eye like his fellow teachers like science master Terry Corrigan (Roddy McDowell), he soon clashes with gang leader Stegman (Timothy Van Patten), setting off a chain of escalating events that puts himself and his wife in mortal danger…
Class of 1984 is one of the seminal cult movies of the 1980s and is director Mark L Lester's contemporary take on the 1955 delinquent drama The Blackboard Jungle. Scripted by Tom Holland (who had just completed The Beast Within and The Initiation of Sarah), it still packs a punch after all these years.
Van Patten's pretty boy Stegman and his gang (which includes a Stefan Arngrim from Land of the Giants fame) may look cartoonish in their Starlight Express-looking faux punk gear, but the bullying that they inflict on fellow students (including a chubby Michael J Fox) is all too real and still very relevant today – as is the drug-dealing, sexual grooming of underage children, and the wanton acts of physical 'and mental' assault on teachers. Alice Cooper supplies the theme song, I Am the Future, Roddy McDowall's meltdown will break your heart, and it still has one of the coolest poster designs of the era.
Class of 1984 makes it UK Blu-ray debit from 101 Films with this Limited Edition release, and it looks and sounds terrific – boasting some great extras…
• Life is Pain… a brand-new career retrospective interview with writer Tom Holland (Fright Night)
• And Pain is Everything: An interview with director Mark L. Lester
• Audio commentary with director Mark L. Lester
• Do What You Love: A career retrospective of Perry King
• History Repeats Itself: An interview with director Mark Lester and composer Lalo Schifrin
• Blood and Blackboards: Interviews with cast and crew
• Girls Next Door: Interviews with actors Erin Noble and Lisa Langlois
• Trailer and TV spots
• Stills gallery
• Collector's booklet
Lester's sequel, Class of 1999, is also getting a new term on Blu-ray, as it joins Lionsgate UK's Vestron Collector's Series.
It's 1999, and youth gang violence is so high that the areas around some US schools have become 'free fire zones' into which not even the police will venture. When principal Miles Langford (Malcolm McDowell) decides to take his Seattle school back from the gangs, robotics specialist Dr Robert Forrest (Stacy Keach) steps in and introduces three android educators. But when the units revert to their original military programming and turn deadly (equipped with some powerful state-of-art weapons), former Blackhearts gang member Cody Culp (Bradley Gregg) must join forces with the rival Razorheads to stop the ensuing carnage…
I don't recall seeing this first time round, but Lester's futuristic sequel ain't half bad. Yes, its all very cheesy, with more hideous Mad Max meets Flashdance costuming, cartoon violence and scenery chewing acting (I'm looking at you Stacy Keach! with your mullet and contacts), but it moves at a great pace and has some impressive physical effects and pyrotechnics – which all look pretty effective in this new transfer. Playing the droids are Patrick Kilpatrick, Pam Grier and John P Ryan – who all gets some suitably OTT Terminator-style demises.
The Lionsgate Blu-ray includes the following extras…
• Audio commentary with producer/director Mark L Lester
• School Safety: interviews with director/producer Mark L Lester and co-producer Eugene Mazzola
• New Rules: an interview with screenwriter C Courtney Joyner
• Cyber-Teachers From Hell: interviews with special effects creators Eric Allard and Rick Stratton
• Future of Discipline: an interview with director of photography Mark Irwin
• Theatrical trailer
• TV spots
• Still gallery
• Video promo
Posted in Crime thriller, Exploitation, Must-See, Thriller
Tags: Malcolm McDowell, Mark L Lester, Michael J Fox, Perry King, Roddy McDowall, Stacy Keach
Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte (1965) | Robert Aldrich's splendidly macabre murder mystery on Blu-ray
From Eureka! Entertainment comes director Robert Aldrich's brooding murder mystery, Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte, starring Bette Davis, on Blu-ray for the first time in the UK.
Don't Tell Anyone What Happened In The Summer House!
Tended by her loyal servant Velma (Agnes Moorehead), Charlotte Hollis (Bette Davis) has been closeted in her family's plantation mansion ever since the brutal murder of her married lover, John Mayhew (Bruce Dern) 37 years earlier. When the local county plans to tear down the house to build a highway, the spinster seeks the help of her New York-based cousin Miriam (Olivia de Havilland), but Charlotte's mind soon becomes unhinged when she sees visions of John's decapitated hand and hearing the song he composed for her wafting through the mansion late at night. Has his ghost really come back to haunt her or is someone trying to drive Charlotte insane?
Regarded as Aldrich's informal follow-up to What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?, this splendidly macabre psychological thriller deservedly stands on its own merits, especially considering its seven Academy Award nominations, including a Best Supporting Actress gong for Agnes Moorehead. She is simply splendid as the dishevelled Velma, who is quick to alert the authorities and an insurance investigator (a twinkly Cecil Kellaway) about her suspicions. Moorehead's old Mercury Theatre pal, Joseph Cotton, meanwhile, chews the scenery big time as the bourbon-soaked Dr Drew Bayliss, who jilted Miriam after the murder.
In her last film role is The Maltese Falcon's Mary Astor. 'Turn her loose, Robert, you might learn something!' was Davis' famous on-set comment about the veteran actress whose scenes as John's seriously-ill widow Jewel are the antithesis of Davis' full-blown hysterics. Nevertheless, Davis brings much pathos to Charlotte (especially in the last half of the film), while Olivia de Havilland (who sensationally replaced Joan Crawford) gives sterling support as the butter-wouldn't-melt Miriam, who is hiding a few dark secrets of her own.
With its atmospheric black and white cinematography (from Aldrich regular Joseph Biroc), meticulous art direction (from William Glasgow and Raphael Bretton), cracking script (from Baby Jane novelist Henry Farrell), ghoulish special effects and nightmarish set pieces, not to mention the memorably haunting theme tune (from Frank De Vol and Mack David), this is a classic murder mystery of the highest order and one that can be revisited over and over..
Watch out for George Kennedy as the demolition foreman, Ellen Corby as one of the town's gossips, and a couple of faces from Baby Jane, including Victor Buono as Charlotte's domineering father whom she believed killed John.
Favourite line: 'Don't turn on the light. It's not real when it's light. It's only real when it's dark… dark and still!'
Eureka! Entertainment presents Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte as part of their Masters of Cinema Series for the first time on Blu-ray in the UK with the following extras…
• 1080p presentation
• LPCM 2.0 Audio
• Optional English SDH subtitles
• Audio commentary by critic Kat Ellinger
• Audio commentary by film historian Glenn Erickson
• Hush…Hush, Sweet Joan: The Making of Charlotte [22 mins]
• Bruce Dern Remembers [13 mins]
• Wizard Work [5 mins] – archival behind-the-scenes look at the film, narrated by Joseph Cotton
• Trailer & TV spots
• Collector's booklet featuring a new essay by Lee Gambin, illustrated with archival imagery
Available to order from Zavvi at http://po.st/vIhZja
Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte, which was shot on location at the historic Houmas plantation in Burnside, Louisiana, was originally going to be called What Ever Happened to Cousin Charlotte? However, Bette Davis disliked the title as it indicated a sequel to Baby Jane, so it was she who suggested using Frank De Vol/Mack David's song title instead. Crooner Al Martino (who sings the tune over the closing credits) released it as a B-side of his January 1965 single release My Heart Would Know, which reached No.52 on the Billboard Hot 100. Bette Davis, Patti Page, Richard Chamberlain and even the UK's very own Bruce Forsyth all released their own versions of the melody.
Posted in Cult classic, Drama, Must See, Must-See, Psychological thriller, Thriller
Long Weekend (1978) | Mother nature strikes back in the cult Oz eco-horror
There's a storm brewing in the city, and also between materialistic married couple, Peter (John Hargreaves) and Marcia (Briony Behets), following Marcia's affair with one of their friends. With a Bank Holiday weekend in sight, Peter engineers a camping trip to an isolated beach, telling Marcia that it will be a chance for them to sort things out. In reality, however, Peter just wants to surf, shoot and drink beer with his faithful dog Cricket by his side, while Marcia would rather prefer a plush hotel than a hot tent in the middle of bloody nowhere.
With total disregard for the environment, the couple set up camp and leave a wake of destruction as they start their bickering. Local wildlife gets run over, shot, splattered and poisoned; petrol cans, plastic and rifle shells litter the beach; and cigarette butts are carelessly tossed away. But when Peter shoots a harmless dugong after mistaking it for a shark, Mother Nature begins to exact her subtle revenge on the unlikeable pair…
This tense and unsettling minimalist horror, helmed by Australian TV director Colin Eggleston, is exceptionally well-made, and has out-lived more worthy period features that dominated the Australian cinema landscape in the late-1970s (like My Brilliant Career and The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith) to achieve true cult status.
Alongside the same year's Patrick, this was also the first successful attempt at genre film-making in Australia, and its all down to the performances of the two leads and the atmospheric imagery that director Eggleston and his tight crew conjure up to reinforce the sense of dread that permeates the film's changing landscape – culminating in a sweat-inducing final 20 minutes that's devoid of dialogue as nature closes in. Amongst the scenes that still manage to creep me out are the Barbie doll covered in seaweed, an abandoned combi van half-submerged in the surf and the scary night-time drive into a dense forest of trees (very Grimms' Fairy Tale).
The film also casts a dark, satirical shadow over Australian identity and middle class mores thanks to an insightful screenplay from Everett De Roche, who is best known for penning a flurry of Ozploitation hits including Patrick (1978), Road Games (1981) and Razorback (1984). He also imbues his screenplay with a mythic quality that hints at the supernatural – something that Peter Weir also aimed at with 1977's The Last Wave (aka Black Rain in the US), in which freak rainstorms in Sydney have a apocalyptic connection with the Aboriginal Dreamtime. But its this element that makes you want to return again and again to the film as there's so much going on under the surface than you first expect.
Alongside 1983's Careful, He Might Hear You and 1986's Malcolm, this is Hargreaves' finest hour, and his honest and authentic performance earned him a Best Actor award at the Sitges Fantasy Film Festival where he beat off Lawrence Olivier, Klaus Kinski and Donald Pleasence (now that's a coup). Sadly, Hargreaves died of AIDS aged just 50 in 1996. But he thought so much of his award that he had it buried with him. Director Eggleston, who died in 2002, never really matched the success of this film with his subsequent features, but Long Weekend remains his enduring legacy.
Long Weekend is out on Blu-ray for the first time in the UK courtesy of Second Sight, with the following special features…
• Audio commentary with executive producer Richard Brennan (Mad Dog Morgan, Spotswood) and cinematographer Vincent Monton (Thirst, Road Games): Recorded in 2006, this commentary reveals lots about the technical aspects of the film, from using a precursor to the steadicam to manipulating the beach location (by spray-painting brought in trees to change the colour palette from green to grey to represent the decay setting in); and also explores the reasons why the film was a bigger success in Europe and Asia than in Australia.
• Nature Found Them Guilty: Examining Long Weekend – Panel discussion with film historians Lee Gambin, Alexandra Heller-Nicholas, Emma Westwood and Sally Christie: The gang go deeper into the film's themes and 'grotty symbolism' to quote Briony's character, including how the film is an indigenous comment without having an indigenous person in the cast.
• Uncut 'Not Quite Hollywood' interviews with Everett De Roche, Briony Behets and Vincent Monton: These are very interesting, especially from Briony, who at the time of filming was married to the film's executive producer, Richard Brennan.
• August 1995 audio interview with the John Hargreaves who talks about acting and his mentor, John Meillon, whom he affectionately called Maude, while the Crocodile Dundee star called him Hilary. This piece also includes a great behind-the-scene picture gallery which might be a bit spoilery if you haven't seen the film first.
• Extensive Stills Gallery
• SDH English subtitles for the hearing impaired
ORDER FROM AMAZON HERE
Posted in Australian film, Must-See, Ozploitation, Thriller
Tags: Briony Behets, Colin Eggleston, Everett De Roche, John Hargreaves, Long Weekend, Second Sight
Search for Reviews
BFI releases
Eurotika
Fantastique & Sci-Fi
Golden Age Classics
Hammer, Amicus, Tigon
Vincent Price Collection
Weird & Avant Garde
Pete's Peek on Movie Talk
Read Pete's Peek on Movie Talk
Bloody Terror: The Shocking Cinema of Norman J Warren (1976-1987) | Indicator's frightfully fantastic box-set dedicated to the British cult horror auteur
Scum | Alan Clarke's brutal borstal drama still shocks 40 years on!
Def-Con 4 | This 1980s post-apocalyptic sci-fi hasn't aged well
The Holy Mountain | The German silent that launched Leni Riefenstahl's career on Blu-ray
Two classic Amicus horror anthologies, The House That Dripped Blood & Asylum, get a limited edition UK Blu-ray release
mick62 on Burke & Hare (1972) | A Ha…
Sarah james on David Hemmings' gritty B…
Sarah seeney on The 14 (1973) | David Hemmings…
Bonus: The Curse of… on The Curse of the Werewolf (196…
Visit The Spooky Isles


text:
Animal Remains Found in Toronto Park
By 680 News Staff
Police say the animal remains discovered in an Etobicoke park on Saturday were those of a cat, not a dog as previously thought.
Police initially tweeted out that the grisly discovery was a dog and it appeared the animal had been skinned.
Police told CityNews on Sunday the animal was a cat buried in a shallow grave that other animals likely dug up. They said there was nothing suspicious about the discovery and no criminal charges are being laid.
PC candidate for Etobicoke-Lakeshore Christine Hogarth first told Citynews she found the remains around 9 a.m. Saturday while walking her dog in Grand Avenue Park in the area of Park Lawn Road and the Gardiner Expressway.
"I normally take my dog for a walk here and when we came to this area you could see there was a hole in the ground and there was a blue towel on the ground and there was a whole bunch of patches of hair," said Hogarth, "About a metre and a half away there was this carcass and it was skinned."
A police investigation concluded there was no criminality involved.
This story originally appeared on 680 News.


What kinds of produce do you offer?
We grow and sell a wide range of produce including leaf crops (salad greens, lettuce, kale, Swiss chard, spinach, mustard greens, sorrel), seed crops (peas, beans, corn), root crops (carrots, beets, parsnips, turnips, rutabaga), vine crops (squash, cucumbers, zucchini, pumpkins), plus onion, leeks, garlic, potatoes, tomatoes, herbs, assorted other vegetables (peppers, tomatillos, artichokes, Jerusalem artichokes, broccoli, kohlrabi, cabbage, Chinese cabbage), some fruit (strawberry, elderberry), and flowers. The produce that we have available changes throughout the season, so please check our Produce Available page or sign up to our weekly email for updates on what we are currently harvesting.
Produce is available from the sales stall that we set up at the Garden during market times. For our location and current market hours, please check our Visit Us page.
Garden produce is available during our twice-weekly markets by donation. Donations should be based on fair market prices – in other words, what you would pay for produce at a farmers' market. All donations for Garden produce go to support the Tubahumurize Association for women in Rwanda.
What forms of payment do you accept for produce?
At this time, we are only able to accept cash for produce.
Can I pick my own produce?
The Garden is not a U-Pick. Garden volunteers will happily pick the produce for you.
Can I make a financial contribution to Tubahumurize?
Yes, in addition to sales of Garden produce and handicrafts from Tubahumurize, we accept direct donations for the Tubahumurize Association. Cheques should be made payable to the University of Alberta. The University will provide a receipt for your donation, but unfortunately it is not an official tax receipt.
If you have any other questions, please let us know and we will get back to you shortly.


Georgia Gator Guides where your launch to fun and adventure is just a click away!! Alligator hunting in Georgia is a very exciting sport and Georgia waters are full of huntable alligators. Wherever your permit and whatever your skill level we can design a unique hunting experience unlike any you've had before.
Randy Pounds, founder of Georgia Gator Guides, with a former Georgia Record Holding gator to his boat's credit, is a 20 year law enforcement veteran who has spent the last decade scouring Georgia waters for the gators you'll be proud to hang your tag on. His observation skills, patience, and, when the time comes, quick reactions all help achieve your goal of a trophy gator. We can guarantee that you WILL have an amazing experience. Wherever your permit is assigned, Randy has a place in mind where gators hang out!!


text:
News Brief: Town, civic organizations honor employee who 'puts public service first'
William Kelly | Our Town | December 12, 2022
Jose Daniel Rojas was named the Town of Palm Beach's 2022 employee of the year at a Palm Beach Chamber of Commerce breakfast Monday at The Breakers.
Rojas is a warehouse coordinator who works in the purchasing division of the Finance Department. He joined the town as a warehouse courier 21 years ago after completing a 20-year career as a medical supplier in the U.S. Army.
Mayor Danielle Moore, who handed out the award plaque to a surprised Rojas at the breakfast, said he is honest, respectful and professional.
"He's always willing to go the extra mile," Moore said of Rojas. "He excels in teamwork. He puts public service first."
Rojas started the town's online auction of its surplus property, which has generated more than $600,000 since it was launched five years ago, Moore said.
In an interview after the breakfast, Finance Director Jane Le Clainche called Rojas "the ideal employee."
"He's always happy, always willing to help, always willing to go above and beyond for everybody and everything," Le Clainche said. "Everybody knows him, and they all love him."
As a recipient of the employee of the year award, Rojas received a check from the Palm Beach Civic Association and the Citizens' Association of Palm Beach.
Known to his co-workers as "Danny," Rojas said he was "speechless" when he realized this year's honor was going to him.
"I was really emotional," he said. "It's a big award."
He said his 21 years as a town employee have been a great experience.
"Everybody is really friendly," Rojas said. "You treat people the way you want to be treated. I make it a positive day, every day."


It's been a lovely weekend so far!
Yesterday our son Sam dropped by nice and early for a visit and chat, and at lunchtime Kezzie, Bert and the boys visited me as well. I sent the boys home with frozen Kit Kat's as it was mighty hot when they left, and it's a nana's delight to give small treats to her grandchildren - for the cost of a hug and kiss of course!
This morning I picked up Blossom nice and early and we went out for breakfast.. As she has been involved with Elefantz from the very beginning, I rely on her as my sounding board for future ideas, and it excites me even more to have her excited about the things I have planned.
Together we discussed pros and cons, and in the technical computer side of things she has offered her assistance. I can't tell you anymore, but I think you'll love what's in store. She made a a wonderful start to my day!
This afternoon we're out together again, but this time 19yo son Sam will join us as we head to the movies to watch the latest version of "The Three Musketeers".
All the projects for Issue 6 of Elefantz HOME are now finished, and the pattern writing has begun.
I thought you might like to see all the things you can make from the next issue, which has a definite bird theme.
...and the applique version of "Bird on Bloom" made up into a cushion cover!
Five new Elefantz designs in Issue 6, and all for just a $4 per month subscription!
If you haven't subscribed yet, but would like to, simply click on the Paypal button below.
You can cancel at any time, and we'll still be friends.
As a thank you gift from me, all new subscriptions made before November 28th will receive a bonus, Elefantz pattern to make while they wait for their first PDF issue of Elefantz HOME to arrive on November 29th!
...was one of my very first original designs but has never been available for purchase. Subscribe and it's all yours.
Now I'm off to get ready for my movie date with the kids.
Hope your own weekend has been a joyful one!
Well, too bad I already have a subscription, cuz that is adorable. :) Seriously, this looks to be a great issue and I can't wait!
The cutest key fobs ever.
Hi Jenny, glad everyone is feeling well again. Last night on our TV I watched a great program about Victoria, Australia. What a lovely country. Are you anywhere near there? It is so nice that you and Blossom are such good friends. I have 2 daughters and we are very close too.
Have a wonderful day with your kids!
Jenny I can't wait for Issue 6!!
Hi Jenny, wasn't a good movie, did you notised that one of the actors was danish, Mads Mikkelsen, the guy with the pad for the eye, I went with my daughter on 18 to see it, so I think it is a mother/children thing to see something like that movie. Looking foreward to receive your next issue.
So glad to hear the kids are looking out for you and not letting you get lonely! You do have great kids!
I'm looking forward to all these lovely patterns you have designed. When I saw the circle of life block, I caught my breath, I love the red bird! Have a great visit with Mr E and enjoy your mc adventures!


We study how to make computers see, hear, understand, plan, and act in the world.
A unique student-developed course to be offered during MIT's Independent Activities Period provides a comprehensive exploration of deep learning.
EECS professors Barzilay and Jaakkola contribute to machine learning approach that could aid the design of industrial processes for drug manufacturing.


Vinery sire Testa Rossa continued his special connection with the Magic Millions when Testashadow landed a longshot victory in the $1 million Woodford Reserve Magic Millions Cup (1400m) on Saturday.
Testashadow ($31) defeated fellow outsider Perfect Dare ($51) in a blanket finish on the Gold Coast.
Testashadow (6g Testa Rossa – Moonlight Shadow by Flying Spur) increased his earning to $1.20 million after changing hands for $50,000 at the 2013 Gold Coast Magic Millions. He is trained by Gary Portelli for Elite Thoroughbreds and is closely related to G1 Coolmore Stud Stakes winner Zoustar.
The Magic Millions Cup improved his record to 7 wins in 29 starts and he was also runner-up to Deiheros in the 2015 Magic Millions Guineas.
Testa Rossa launched his Group 1 winning career with a four-length victory in the 1999 Magic Millions Classic. He sired class colt Unencumbered to win the 2014 Classic and he's also the damsire of 2015 Classic winner Le Chef.
Testa Rossa had 4 yearlings average $100,000 during Days 1, 2 & 3 at the Magic Millions yearling sale this week and there are another 3 on offer on Sunday.


text:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1" />
<title>Secret</title>
<meta name="generator" content="Org mode" />
<meta name="author" content="Wu, Shanliang" />

<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../../css/main.css" />

  UP
 |
  HOME

Secret

Table of Contents

Opaque Secret

将Secret挂载到Volume中

将Secret导出到环境变量中

kubernetes.io/dockerconfigjson

Service Account

Secret解决了 密码 、 token 、 密钥 等 敏感 数据的配置问题,而不需要把这些敏感数据暴露到镜像或者Pod Spec中。Secret可以以 Volume 或者 环境变量 的方式使用。Secret有三种类型:

Service Account :用来访问Kubernetes API,由Kubernetes自动创建,并且会自动挂载到Pod的 /run/secrets/kubernetes.io/serviceaccount目录中

Opaque : base64编码 格式的Secret,用来存储密码、密钥等

kubernetes.io/dockerconfigjson :用来存储私有docker registry的认证信息

Opaque Secret

Opaque 类型的数据是一个 map 类型,要求 value 是 base64编码 格式:

$ echo -n "admin" | base64
YWRtaW4=
$ echo -n "1f2d1e2e67df" | base64
MWYyZDFlMmU2N2Rm

secrets.yml:

apiVersion: v1
kind: Secret
metadata:
  name: mysecret
type: Opaque
data:
  password: MWYyZDFlMmU2N2Rm
  username: YWRtaW4=

接着,就可以创建secret了:

$kubectl create -f secrets.yml

创建好secret之后,有两种方式来使用它:

以Volume方式

以环境变量方式

将Secret挂载到Volume中

apiVersion: v1
kind: Pod
metadata:
  labels:
    name: db
  name: db
spec:
  volumes:
  - name: secrets
    secret:
      secretName: mysecret
  containers:
  - image: gcr.io/my_project_id/pg:v1
    name: db
    volumeMounts:
    - name: secrets
      mountPath: "/etc/secrets"
      readOnly: true
    ports:
    - name: cp
      containerPort: 5432
      hostPort: 5432

将Secret导出到环境变量中

apiVersion: extensions/v1beta1
kind: Deployment
metadata:
  name: wordpress-deployment
spec:
  replicas: 2
  strategy:
      type: RollingUpdate
  template:
    metadata:
      labels:
	app: wordpress
	visualize: "true"
    spec:
      containers:
      - name: "wordpress"
	image: "wordpress"
	ports:
	- containerPort: 80
	env:
	- name: WORDPRESS_DB_USER
	  valueFrom:
	    secretKeyRef:
	      name: mysecret
	      key: username
	- name: WORDPRESS_DB_PASSWORD
	  valueFrom:
	    secretKeyRef:
	      name: mysecret
	      key: password

kubernetes.io/dockerconfigjson

可以直接用kubectl命令来创建用于docker registry认证的secret:

$ kubectl create secret docker-registry myregistrykey --docker-server=DOCKER_REGISTRY_SERVER --docker-username=DOCKER_USER --docker-password=DOCKER_PASSWORD --docker-email=DOCKER_EMAIL
secret "myregistrykey" created.

也可以直接读取 ~/.docker/config.json 的内容来创建:

$ cat ~/.docker/config.json | base64
$ cat > myregistrykey.yaml <<EOF
apiVersion: v1
kind: Secret
metadata:
  name: myregistrykey
data:
  .dockerconfigjson: UmVhbGx5IHJlYWxseSByZWVlZWVlZWVlZWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWxsbGxsbGxsbGxsbGxsbGxsbGxsbGxsbGxsbGxsbGx5eXl5eXl5eXl5eXl5eXl5eXl5eSBsbGxsbGxsbGxsbGxsbG9vb29vb29vb29vb29vb29vb29vb29vb29vb25ubm5ubm5ubm5ubm5ubm5ubm5ubm5ubmdnZ2dnZ2dnZ2dnZ2dnZ2dnZ2cgYXV0aCBrZXlzCg==
type: kubernetes.io/dockerconfigjson
EOF
$ kubectl create -f myregistrykey.yaml

在创建Pod的时候,通过 imagePullSecrets 来引用刚创建的myregistrykey:

apiVersion: v1
kind: Pod
metadata:
  name: foo
spec:
  containers:
    - name: foo
      image: janedoe/awesomeapp:v1
  imagePullSecrets:
    - name: myregistrykey

Service Account

Service Account用来访问Kubernetes API,由Kubernetes自动创建,并且会自动挂载到Pod的 /run/secrets/kubernetes.io/serviceaccount 目录中:

$ kubectl run nginx --image nginx
deployment "nginx" created

$ kubectl get pods
NAME                     READY     STATUS    RESTARTS   AGE
nginx-3137573019-md1u2   1/1       Running   0          13s

$ kubectl exec nginx-3137573019-md1u2 ls /run/secrets/kubernetes.io/serviceaccount
ca.crt
namespace
token

<colgroup>
<col  class="org-left" />

<col  class="org-left" />
</colgroup>

Next: ConfigMap
Home:存储