text:
(CNN) -- Eating ethically is no easy task these days. One problem is deciding which ethic is more important. Keeping third-world farmers in fair trade jobs by purchasing their produce? Or assuaging your concerns over the environmental impact of getting that produce to your kitchen by shopping locally instead?
A farmer at work in California. The UN says the food cultivation stage is the most damaging in the food chain.
Up until recently it has been the latter concern -- how food is transported -- that has hogged the limelight when it comes to looking at the role the food chain plays in climate change. Statistics such as the fact that the average American meal travels on average 1,500 miles before it gets to the diner's plate, have led to stronger backing for "grow locally" movements.
But the local food movement has been greeted with dismay by the developing world -- and for good reason.
According to the UK-based Food Climate Research Network (FCRN), as many as 1.5 million people in the developing world, in particular in sub-Saharan Africa, depend on the export horticulture market. Agricultural exports, meanwhile, have been partly to thank for Africa's economic growth rates of around 5 per cent a year, according to the UK Department for International Development (DFID).
British shoppers alone spend more than $2 million every single day on fruit and vegetables imported from Africa. Encouraging them to shop locally instead of buying imported produce from the developing world could obviously have disastrous consequences for third-world farmers.
Domestic not international food miles can leave bigger footprint
Doing away with food imports could be seen as understandable if international transport played a dominant role in the food chain's greenhouse gas emissions.
But in the UK 's case -- where much of the research into the "food miles" concept has taken place -- that doesn't seem to be the case. A sturdy 85 percent of UK food transport-related emissions actually derive from domestic road deliveries according to the DFID. Road freight traffic in the UK grew by 67 percent between 1980 and 2001, with the average journey length also increasing by 40 percent.
By comparison, international freight contributes 11 percent of UK food transport-related emissions -- that's less than one-tenth of one percent of the UK 's overall emissions, the DFID says.
Transportation as a whole contributes 2.5 percent of the food chain's emissions, says FCRN. Food refrigeration, on the other hand, accounts for as much as 18 percent (and notably 3.5 percent of the UK 's entire greenhouse gas emissions).
The whole transport issue initially came to the fore after the "food miles" concept was coined in Europe to illustrate how fossil fuel-intensive the global food distribution network had become.
But the relative blame that the transport sector should be taking for this is debatable.
In the U.S., up to 20 percent of the country's fossil fuel consumption goes into the food chain, according to the UN's Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), which points out that fossil fuel use by the food systems in the developed world "often rivals that of automobiles".
To feed an average family of four in the developed world uses up the equivalent of 930 gallons of gasoline a year -- just shy of the 1,070 gallons that same family would use up each year to power their cars.
The average developed world diet uses 1,600 liters of fossil fuels each year, according to the U.S. based Organic Consumers Association (OCA). Only 256 of those liters come from transporting the food, says OCA.
By contrast, a whopping 496 liters goes into the chemical fertilizers used during the food growing stage, representing well over one third of the food chain's entire fossil fuel consumption.
Food production responsible for much of greenhouse gas emissions
According to the FAO, the food and agricultural sector is responsible for more than one third of global greenhouse gas emissions, with "by far the most important" aspect of that sector's environmental impact, it says, lying in the initial production process -- not in transportation.
Within that initial stage, the most harmful activities are deforestation and cultivation. Deforestation, which clears the way for food to be grown, accounts for 18 percent of the food and agriculture sector's emissions. Cultivation, including "intensive livestock operations, irrigated rice paddies and application of synthetic fertilizers on cultivated land" releases enough methane and nitrous oxide to account for 13.5 percent of the sector's greenhouse gas contribution.
Quoting the UK-based Soil Association, the FAO says in conventional agriculture (i.e. non-organic) the largest amount of energy used -- 37 percent -- goes towards "synthetic pesticides and mineral fertilizers, particularly nitrogen, and to a lesser extent, phosphorous, and potassium."
Nitrogen fertilizer in particular is extremely fossil fuel-intensive, requiring 1.5 tons of oil equivalents to make 1 ton of fertilizer.
Meat and methane: climate killers?
There is, of course, one other major source of greenhouse gas emissions in the food chain: Meat.
Back in 2006, the FAO revealed that rearing livestock produced more greenhouse gas emissions than the transportation sector -- 18 percent of the world's entire greenhouse gas emissions.
Notably, livestock production generates 37 percent of human-induced methane and 65 percent of human-related nitrous oxide emissions. Methane has 23 times the global warming potential of CO2; the impact of nitrous oxide meanwhile is a staggering 296 times more powerful.
Meat and dairy represent 50 percent of "total food related impacts", according to the Climate Action Program. And in terms of the fossil fuel bill meat runs up, for that family of four who is using up 930 gallons of fossil fuel a year on food, 265 gallons of it goes towards putting meat on their table.
Going vegetarian, or vegan, therefore is being increasingly suggested as one of the best ways to slash our carbon contributions. A University of Chicago study found, for example that meat-eaters individually emit 1.5 more tons of emissions a year than vegetarians or vegans; and according to the OCA, it takes 8 times as many fossil fuels to produce animal protein than their plant equivalent.
Being vegetarian is by no means a panacea, however, as even the OCA concedes that eating a 2 kg box of vegetarian-friendly cereal is the equivalent of burning half a gallon of gasoline.
But perhaps banking on everyone going vegetarian fails to take into account one simple fact: 1.4 billion people work in the global livestock sector and rely on meat-eaters for their livelihoods.
How one would go about telling 1.4 billion people to shut up shop is anyone's guess. E-mail to a friend
(Source: Organic Consumers Association; Sustainable Business; The Guardian; The New Yorker; UN Food and Agricultural Organization; UK Department for International Development; Transport 2000 Trust; Food & Water Watch; Danish Institute of International Studies)
All About Global Climate Change


text:
PORTLAND, Maine — Statoil North America on Wednesday said it was putting its offshore wind energy project on hold because of "the risk and uncertainty" created last week when the Legislature, at Gov. Paul LePage's behest, made changes that will delay and potentially threaten state approval for the project.
The Norwegian company informed the Maine Public Utilities Commission of its decision on Wednesday in a letter.
Statoil's departure would be a big loss for the state from an economic development point of view, according to Annette Bossler, an international business consultant based in Bremen.
Bossler, who consults for a German company that is developing a pilot offshore wind energy project in the Baltic Sea, said that in the next two or three years there will be at least a billion dollars invested around the world by offshore wind technology developers. Maine has threatened its ability to receive any part of that investment, Bossler said.
"We have a huge opportunity to be part of a global industry, but there needs to be commitment, and I think now that commitment, you can argue, is questionable," Bossler told the Bangor Daily News.
Last week, the Maine Legislature approved LD 1472, which reopens a process by which the Maine Public Utilities Commission approved a plan in late January to subsidize Statoil's project with ratepayer support. The support allowed the Norwegian company to move ahead with its plan to erect four floating turbines in federal waters off the Maine coast by 2016.
The University of Maine, which also is developing offshore wind energy technology, was not prepared to submit a proposal when the PUC first issued a request in 2010. LD 1472 would delay Statoil's project to allow UMaine to submit its own proposal, and therefore compete with Statoil for that ratepayer support.
The Legislature's actions sent a message, Bossler said: "If you want to build your full-scale pilot to develop this technology further, Maine is not really a reliable location," she said.
And the world is watching. The Legislature's last-minute legislative changes last week was reported throughout the wind energy industry media, including in Europe, Bossler said.
"That is not something only Statoil will notice. Other big players in the industry will notice as well," she said.
Paul Williamson, executive director of the Maine Ocean & Wind Industry Initiative, confirms that Maine is on the world stage, but not in the best light.
"I've had conversations directly with both small and large players in the international offshore wind industry, and I've received reaction from those various parties that if the state of Maine doesn't follow through with Statoil, they would not think of the state of Maine as a good place to invest in offshore wind energy," Williamson said Wednesday.
Ola Aanestad, Statoil North America's vice president of communications, wrote in an email to the Bangor Daily News on Wednesday that the company will continue "a robust dialogue with stakeholders related to the Hywind Maine Project."
"However, given the uncertainty created by the recent law change (LD 1472), Statoil is now preparing to put the Hywind Maine Project on hold, while we assess the changes made to the law, the total risk picture and our progress plan going forward," he wrote. "We will keep the option open to re-initiate project activity if we should find the total risk picture related to the Maine project acceptable."
Maine is not the only place the company is looking to launch its pilot project.
"Statoil is considering several locations for building a pilot park based on the Hywind floating concept, in addition to Maine," he wrote.
Bossler, who in May released a report on the global offshore wind energy industry, said Statoil is looking at a pilot project in Scotland and in November signed an agreement with Hitachi in Japan.
"So Statoil has options. Maine, on the one hand, is a very good market because of the wind resources we have, but you need to have the reliable commitment to have a big company say, 'this is where we're going to spend the money.' Because there are other places in the world you could do this."
UMaine's project involves placing 170 6-megawatt floating wind turbines in the Gulf of Maine in an effort to generate up to 20 gigawatts of electricity by 2030, which is some 15 years later than Statoil proposes being online. The UMaine project involves the university's Advanced Structures and Composites Center and Pittsfield-based building contractor Cianbro, among other entiti es.
Williamson said the state's desire to support UMaine's project "is fantastic," but it should have gone about it another way.
"They have some really brilliant ideas under development at the University of Maine that deserve state support," he said last week after the Legislature passed LD 1472. "However, it would have been better for the Maine renewable energy climate had the Legislature identified creative ways to support the university without disrupting the state's agreement with Statoil."
Tom Welch, chairman of the PUC, wasn't surprised by Statoil's decision.
He acknowledged that LD 1472, which will force the PUC to reopen its review process and consider UMaine's project for ratepayer support, delays the PUC's approval of Statoil's contract and therefore creates uncertainty for the company.
"This doesn't particularly surprise me," he said. "It may be a rational reaction to a level of uncertainty in terms of timing at the very least of when the contract would be executed. Corporations have to make their own decision."
There has been some deliberation over whether the PUC could provide ratepayer support to both the Statoil and UMaine projects, but Welch said that isn't likely, at least if both were the size of Statoil's project.
"You could certainly not support both of them at the level Statoil is now. The ability just isn't there," he said.
Welch wouldn't comment on what message the Legislature sent when it passed LD 1472, except to say, "Obviously people in the private sector always prefer that things stay exactly the way they are. But that just isn't the case in the real world."

subset: commoncrawl


text:
We've seen laptop's made of wood, bamboo, carbon fiber and—most recently—glass. Now, a new plastic replacement based on recycled paper might be making its way to a computer on your lap.
Developed by PEGA, Paper PP Alloy is a paper-based material that's designed to be strong, sturdy, and environmentally friendly. The ideas is that it could happily replace plastics — but because it's made of paper it should, in theory, be far, far easier to recycle.
The material is made from a combination of recyclable paper and polypropylene, and it can be formed using injection molding methods. While some commentators have suggested that it might be difficult to easily separate polypropylene from paper fibers come recycling—pointing out that polylactic acid may have been a better choice—it's still an amazing concept.
For now, this is a great start. PEGA assures us that you'll start seeing the material in commercial use in the very near future. [PEGA]


text:
McGwire 3: The Advisor
In The New York Times, my friend Rich Sandomir has an extraordinary piece on the arranging of the Costas/McGwire interview, and the rest of yesterday's 'limited hang-out,' as a component of the Mark McGwire Contrition Tour.
In The New York Times, my friend Rich Sandomir has an extraordinary piece on the arranging of the Costas/McGwire interview, and the rest of yesterday's 'limited hang-out,' as a component of the Mark McGwire Contrition Tour.
"What would Mantle have been like with a miracle elixir that let him come back from injuries?"
Ummm…. there was, and Mantle admitted to taking it — amphetamines.
Perhaps one of the folks more familiar with the glory of the good old days can tell me how how taking a schedule II drug that allowed one to recover from an overly active night life while providing a pronounced energy boost shows more integrity than taking a schedule III drug that vastly increases returns on training and speeds recovery from injury.
Amphetamines actually decrease the body's ability to heal. Ever see a methhead? Their skin isn't like that just because they pick at it; it's like that because meth depresses the immune system. Even a methhead who doesn't pick will look older and more haggard because the body suddenly can't repair day-to-day damage.
Gee, zonk… nice to know you can be civil. As to the "substance" of your remarks, amphetamines, even if Mantle did take them, wouldn't make him stronger, and they wouldn't actually make him play better – he would be more awake, yes, but likely to be more erratic. He might feel like he was playing better, but that wouldn't necessarily be true. Amphetamines don't heal the body. They don't add bulk or muscle, either. That doesn't make taking them the right thing to do, but it isn't in the same category. Steroids make a more permanent change in one's physiology, one that skews the statistics for those who are taking them. The changes made by amphetamines are smaller and only last a few hours. Neither one is right, but the difference is substantial. If there is any "FAIL" here, it is your inability to discuss the issue with some modicum of civility.
As contemptuous as McGwire has been through the apology process, I'm confused as to the reaction of so many in the baseball world. Not minutes after the statement had been issued to the AP, Tony LaRussa was on the air claiming that McGwire coming clean was an illustration of McGwire's "character". I'm sorry to have to inform a man of Tony's age and stature that admitting to something ten to twenty years after the fact, and only when you have to because of your new job, is not a sign of character. If McGwire were the least bit sincere about having wanted to come clean, he would have done so the minute the statute of limitations ended in 2006. The fact that he was more than willing to sit in silence and allow people to believe that he was the hero he still believed himself to be is proof that he doesn't understand the situation he finds himself in. It is not impossible to see how a player, especially one so mythologized, can delude himself into believing in his divinity. But for members of the media, let alone the manager whose own career is now blotted by having presided over the reign of one of the most decorated cheaters in baseball history, to claim that McGwire should deserve praise for lying to the world for a decade until it was convenient for him to stop, that's the kind of blind stupidity baseball doesn't need another dose of.
Comparing methamphetamines to a pure amphetamine is nonsense. One is a bastardized stimulant that was concocted solely for its psychotropic effects, the latter has limited medicinal uses (hence, its classification as a schedule II rather than schedule I drug).
Amphetamine usage (and abuse) was in widespread up to and including WWII (both allied and axis armies supplied their troops with amphetamines for the alertness and energy). It wasn't until a decade after WWII that science confronted the fact that amphetamines are also quite addictive and have a number of deleterious side effects — finally making their unprescribed use and possession illegal in 1965… so I guess technically, Mantle was only using an illegal performance enhancer for the last few dreg years of his career (and make no mistake — Mantle himself copped to amphetamine use during his twilight years, after he got sober and much to his credit, went on speaking tours about substance abuse).
Who's to say that without a chemical agent that can temporarily counteract the effects of long nights out — something Mantle was famous for – Mantle doesn't drink himself out of baseball by the time he's 28?
Who's to say Mickey Cochrane's knees don't last longer if he had cortizone available to him?
Who's to say George Sisler doesn't beat his own former record for hits in a season – putting it out of reach for Ichiro – if lasix eye surgery is available to him.
Keith's whole argument- hardly unique – is just the same old tired "you damn kids get off my lawn" mau-mauing.
Medical science advances. Society changes – quite often without real evidence or logical basis – which pharmaceuticals it considers illegal and which it condones (and if medical science finds a way to synthesize steroids but eliminate the harmful side effects, I guarantee they won't be illegal for long).
You want to draw the line at "illegal"?
Fine… first – though – google "Dr. Feelgood", "1960s", and "New York Yankees"… you'll find scads of reporting on the favorite chemist of the fabled Yankees, and his concoctions (which, by the way, were also purported to contain primitive steroids). Then google around for Hank Aaron – God bless him, he's been the biggest voice of reason in this whole mess – and his own admission that he, too, used amphetamines.
The self-righteous "back in my day" patrol has had plenty of time — YEARS already – to pile on its rose colored glasses of wankery.
It's time to grow up.
Baseball is and has always been a perfect game played by imperfect people, controlled by imperfect owners, overseen by imperfect commissioners, and watched by imperfect fans.
Amazing, zonk… You say this: "The self-righteous 'back in my day' patrol has had plenty of time — YEARS already – to pile on its rose colored glasses of wankery." and this: "same old tired 'you damn kids get off my lawn' mau-mauing." And then you say:
"It's time to grow up." Pot, meet kettle.
Well, my plan to distract the PED jihadists by giving them a different shiny object to fixate on is working perfectly.
As for 'fail' being so "2005 or 2006" — that still makes it about 3 or 4 years fresher than the same tired steroid rhetoric contained in this post.
Watching these players come clean is so interesting to me, because they realize they have to come clean, but they only want to do it on their own terms. And it's always undone when they get tripped up on the inconsistencies of their own stories.
The narrative that McGuire had put in place in his own maladroit head (and rationalized) was meant to be a simple, linear means of backhandedly justifying his own actions in an attempt to both take the blame for his actions and then to pass it along with vague hand-waving to the "steriods era" or injury concerns. But under the scrutiny of someone to whom "the man upstairs" gifted a greater intellect than McGuire received (here I'm thinking Bob Costas), his story is clearly seen for what it is: diaphanous, contradictory, and full of holes.
The most flagrant example of this, I thought, was the point where McGuire acknowledged that those in the Maris family who believe RM's single-season home run record to be intact had a valid point. Yet, not five minutes earlier, McGuire had claimed that he would have broken that record even without steroids.
Don't want to jump into the middle of the debate, just have a couple of random comments. I know someone who was a big league ball player. He played for LaRussa and said he was the biggest horse's ptoot he had ever known. I am thinking of the irony of Albert Pujols having McGwire as a coach, when as far as we know, Albert is clean. Is he now guilty by association? I am not that naive; ball players have forever done bad things to their bodies and will continue to do so, for whatever reason. They are after all , human beings, not mythological/ supernatural creatures who play a kid's game.
When I see a tall rookie ( weighing only 215 lbs hit 49 HR in a very tough Park to hit HRs, (Oakland) I certainly cannot say he couldn't have hit 60-70 HRS in later years without Steroids with natural weight and strength gain. His physical stature towers over Roger Maris' who hit 61 HR. That rookie HR record still stands, so what McGuire says about his ability w/o steroids could be correct. Oberman can not say he couldn't do that and the steroids were what increased his HR production. I thought Oberman had some sports knowledge. The man was a large man with a HR uppercut swing when he broke in. A better hitter than Dave Kingman who hit 40+ HR many times. Go back and look at some of the long HRs that McGuire hit in Oakland his rookie year at 215 lbs. There is no clear conclusion that McGuire used Steroids to increase his production although it may have. A 400 foot home run counts the same as one that goes 450 ft. It counts as one HR. THe later just causes more ahhhs. Mike Schmidt and Hank Aaron hit a lot of 375-400 foot home runs. They all count as one HRs.
Oberman must examine McGuires early home run success and expect it to get better as he matured as a hitter, gained natural strength and got to know the pitchers. Steroids may have helped his HR numbers, but then they may not have. McGuire truly believes it didn't and he may be right. No way to know. This isn't a case of a thin Luis Gonzalez who averaged 15 HRs per season for 10 years and then a bigger Luis Gonzalez hitting 57 all of a sudden. That's the kind of stuff that should be looked at. It wasn't like McGuire was hitting a lot of track outs like Luis Gonzales that all of a sudden became HRs.
I waited until I had seen your report on Countdown before I commented on this, because I wanted to see Mark McWhiner's facial expressions, as well as hear his words. We don't get MLB Network in my neck of the woods, so thanks for providing that video on your show.
Now that I've seen it, I can only say…wow. This dude's divorced from reality, and drowning in denial, as he pulled every lame excuse possible out of his backside, flinging them at the public – much like an angry monkey would do with…you know. Baseball is only his #2 gift "from the man upstairs". His main talent is for rationalizing his own misdeeds, a talent so pure, that he could have a bright future in running for public office. When he started crying crocodile tears, I expected that, at any minute, he would either say, "I have sinned!" or "I love my country, and I fear for it." If newsgroups were still in vogue, there would be one devoted to him, called alt.pathological.liar.
Your observations are right on the money, especially the part about his performance being pushed from 0 to 70. Lots of players get injured, but using drugs improperly to have an advantage in healing can be boiled down to one word: Cheating.
Maybe somebody ought to start pumping these dopers full of flaxseed oil. Since these guys are so full of something else that I won't mention, flaxseed oil's laxative effect might offer them some measure of relief.
One quick note, Keith: "Fail" is still in use (Rachel Maddow just used it on her show tonight), most likely because of the hilarious blog, failblog.org. In which case, it's appropriate for me to term zonk84's asinine arguments as EPIC FAIL, for the reasons others here have already expressed. 😉
@ssimon721, there are better ways to express disagreement than to write, "I thought Oberman had some sports knowledge." Suggesting that a baseball expert has no sports knowledge only undermines your own credibility, as does your repeated misspelling of Keith's name. It has an L, and TWO N's. I wouldn't point out a mere typo, as that would be nitpicking. However, repeatedly disregarding such an obvious detail, combined with your ludicrous statement, makes it harder for one to trust your judgment about other details, as well.
Finally, I've alerted the "usher" about the troll posts, and if anyone else would like to do the same, I wouldn't refuse your backup. 🙂
I have no problem with McGuire in his capacity as a batting coach for St. Louis. Damage control towards the coming season.Two months from now McGuire will be a distraction at Spring Training, but by then the story will be old enough, and McGuire in the coaching staff background enough, to minimize the prospect of an uncomfortable sideshow. And this coming season is what this is about. There's the Hall of Fame in the background, of course, but McGuire or his handlers are deluding themselves if they believe McGuire can overcome the damage from his testimony (or lack thereof) to Congress.Not now, not EVER.The argument that McGuire (and Sosa) saved baseball in the wake of the Strike is beside the point.That other players took those drugs and others is beside the point.That some drugs were legal or illegal is beside the point.The problem I DO have with McGuire comes down to what I perceive to be his arrogance.The arrogance of attributing "The Man Upstairs" (TMU) for his abilities at baseball coupled with the reality that TMU wasn't sufficient in those years when he supplemented TMU with PED's.The arrogance that sustained his then belief that it was the right decision.The arrogance that sustained his later belief that not fessing up to Congress would make little difference in what he hoped his legacy (HOF) would be.The arrogance that sustains his belief now – assuming this isn't a cynical charade towards mitigating an uncomfortable distraction within the Cardinals organization, as well as a desperate plea for serious HOF consideration – that wags cracking wise during BP and writers pondering HOF candidates are going to look past his use of steroids because of his (arrogant) contention that he only used to get healthy and when that didn't work, he used some more because in the wake of unhealthy results, his earnest desire to get healthy pointed to his regretful (in hindsight) decision to keep at it.Mark, I urge you to come to grips with the reality that you will never be in the Hall of Fame, not because of the voters for such an honor don't emphasize with you or refuse to understand your decision making process – or even fail to recognize "The Man Upstairs" – but because of the decisions you made.You, Mark, decided to bring PED's onto the baseball field via their presence in your body.You, Mark, decided to avoid the question of your use of steroids when you were before Congress.You, Mark, have presently decided to "come clean" but in so doing, paint what you are coming clean for was without consequence or affect in how you performed your job as a baseball player under the effects of Performance ENHANCING drugs.I wish you well in St. Louis, Mark, but when I see you before a game I won't be able to not remember the arrogant decisions you made which artificially impacted the game of baseball, as well as your continued arrogance for believing that as a part of this dirty mess, that you could imagine you could convince anyone that those spatters and stains across your uni were simply gravel, grass, and pine tar and not something much more muddy and brown.
Ummm … McGwire. Not McGuire. Sorry.Obviously, disregard everything I've written.
@astrophann – Hey, at least you realized you made a mistake, and you didn't suggest to an expert that he doesn't know much about sports, so you're not going to get any criticism from me. 😉
The reason I returned was to share this video, because it was implied upthread that Keith hasn't criticized Yankee drug abusers. (Yeah, I know this isn't about Dr. Feelgood, but Yankees have used PED's since then.) This video also includes the Jimmy Swaggart "I have sinned" quote I referred to in my own post – just in case anyone here might be too young to have heard it the first time out:
Countdown's Apology Hall Of Fame
KO proves himself, time and time again, that he is as knowledgeable as they come in terms of the history of baseball and in terms of just how the business, egos, conventional wisdom(s) and general day to day assessments of what's happening in baseball, grasping the tangibles and being able to intelligently ponder the intangibles, his analysis is not only pretty spot on, it's usually an enjoyable read.
I'm glad he takes the time to write this blog.
Why is it that McGuire's so called crisis Manager Mr. Fleischer didn?t advise him to promise to do something he promised infront of congress he would do, Go out and raise awareness about the ill effects of the steroids he so ? regrettably? took. If memory serves right Mc Gwire said during his testimony that he would go out and do work in order to discourage steroid use especially in Americas youth and since that testimony he has done little to nothing that resembles that. Mc Gwire should promise to go to Boys and girls clubs and other youth organizations as the Cardinals travel this summer and spread a message that steroid use is stupid and does horribly things to a person?s body. From what I got out of the interview twith Bob Costas a young baseball player who knows little about the history of the game let alone the steroid era and Mc Gwire might see steroids as a way to heal their body ( Something McGwire stated multiple times) quickly and get them back to playing. In my opinion I think McGwire did a lot to promote steroid use yesterday and its ability to ?heal? the injured body.
Why is it that McGuire's so called crisis Manager Mr. Fleischer didn?t advise him to promise to do something he promised infront of congress he would do, Go out and raise awareness about the ill effects of the steroids he so ? regrettably? took. If memory serves right Mc Gwire said during his testimony that he would go out and do work in order to discourage steroid use especially in Americas youth and since that testimony he has done little to nothing that resembles that. Mc Gwire should promise to go to Boys and girls clubs and other youth organizations as the Cardinals travel this summer and spread a message that steroid use is stupid and does horribly things to a person?s body. From what I got out of the interview twith Bob Costas a young baseball player who knows little about the history of the game let alone the steroid era and Mc Gwire might see steroids as a way to heal their body ( Something McGwire stated multiple times) quickly and get them back to playing. In my opinion I think McGwire did a lot to promote steroid use yesterday and its ability to ?heal? the injured body.
When I see a tall rookie ( weighing only 215 lbs hit 49 HR in a very tough Park to hit HRs, (Oakland) I certainly cannot say he couldn't have hit 60-70 HRS in later years without Steroids with natural weight and strength gain. His physical stature towers over Roger Maris' who hit 61 HR. That rookie HR record still stands, so what McGuire says about his ability w/o steroids could be correct. Oberman can not say he couldn't do that and the steroids were what increased his HR production. I thought Oberman had some sports knowledge. The man was a large man with a HR uppercut swing when he broke in. A better hitter than Dave Kingman who hit 40+ HR many times. Go back and look at some of the long HRs that McGuire hit in Oakland his rookie year at 215 lbs.
Excellent points.
You don't need to be hitting coach to see that there definitely WERE pronounced differences in McGwire's swing between his rookie year — when for-some-reason-suddenly credible Jose Canseco says they were both "clean" — and later in his career. Even more than the uppercut, McGwire tended to hit off his back foot more early in his career. His weight transfer was much better synchronized with the hips opening up later — he was 'turning on' pitches much better as he got older, and most certainly driving through pitches rather than clubbing them.
The same is true, for that matter, with Barry Bonds – a truly gifted and strikezone cognizant hitter who adjusted his approach as the strikezone changed. Compare early 90s Barry – who laid off anything letter high to later/steroid Barry, who was launching such pitches not because the steroids allowed him to — but because MLB dictated umpires start calling high strikes.
It's no surprise, considering he's alone as the best mainstream baseball writer in the world today, but Joe Posnanski had the best take on the whole McGwire issue here. In particular, the addendum he added from Negro Leaguer Buck O'Neil is worth more than all the spittle spent on the issue by all the frothy outrage-aholics combined:
*There's another thing, something you don't hear people talk about much. In fact, my old friend Buck O'Neil was about the only person I ever heard talk openly about this. Buck would get infuriated because people constantly talked about the "benefits" of using steroids to the exclusion of almost everything else. He'd say something like: "Well, people talk all the time about how they will help you hit the ball farther and pitch the ball faster. Why don't they talk instead about how you might die young? Why don't they talk about how you might not be able to have children? Why are they always telling children: 'Use this and it will make you a great baseball player… but you shouldn't use it?'"
Which is damn true.
Ironically, the very folks so in love with their tsk-tsk'ing at the McGwires, the Bonds, and the rest do more to glorify steroids than any HR record ever could.
To the PED jihadist, Mark McGwire would have been bagging groceries or at best, topping out as Bob Hamelin without PEDs.
It's nonsense.


text:
You will very soon be able to use Microsoft's Cortana voice assistant with the Raspberry Pi 3 and make cool devices that can accept voice commands.
But for that, you'll need to upgrade the popular developer board, which can run Windows 10 IoT Core, to the Creators Update of the OS.
You'll be able to use Cortana on Raspberry Pi similar to the way it works on PCs. You'll be able to ask for weather, time, traffic, or stock prices.
Users will also able to build smart devices using Raspberry Pi 3 that will be able to accept Cortana's commands. But the devices will need to be based on Windows 10 IoT Core, not Linux-based OSes.
Customized commands can be programmed for devices and could be related to reminders, look-ups, mapping, events, news, dictionary, and other "skills."
Microsoft mentions one Cortana functionality called "chit chat," which could refer to chatbots.
That's a direct attack on Amazon's Alexa or Google Assistant voice assistant technologies, which are being programmed into more smart devices.
Many enthusiasts are developing smart devices but can't slip in personal assistant features. Microsoft is making that much easier with the Creators Update to Windows 10 IoT Core.
Microsoft is pursuing an aggressive smart home strategy via Cortana, and the addition of the personal assistant to Windows 10 IoT Core could be a big piece in the strategy.
Outside Raspberry Pi 3, Microsoft's Windows IoT Core also works with other boards and computers.
Creators Update adds support for Intel's Compute Sticks and also base support for Intel chips code-named Apollo Lake. The OS already supports boards like Intel's Joule and MinnowBoard.
But board enthusiasts will need to take some considerations into account if they want to use Cortana with the Windows 10 IoT Core developer boards. Cortana needs microphones and speakers, and the options there are limited. The Creators Update supports only Logitech's S150 USB speakers, and the microphone options include Microsoft LifeCam HD 3000, Sound Tech CM-1000USB Table Top Conference Meeting Microphone, and Blue Microphones Snowball iCE Condenser Microphone/Cardioid.
Other improvements with Creators Update include support for more Adafruit peripherals that are widely used to make smart devices.
Additionally, the OS adds supports for autodiscovery of smart devices in which you are logged in, which was considered an issue earlier. This change is likely due to the integration of IoTivity IoT protocols from Open Connectivity Foundation, which helps establish secure connections between IoT devices.
The OS adds supports for new ARM PCI bus interconnects. Many low-power smart devices with Windows IoT Core use ARM CPUs but don't use the PCI interconnect, which is used in PCs. This is a feature aimed more at high-powered developer boards that don't operate on battery.
You will need to flash Creators Update on the developer boards using the Windows 10 IoT Core Dashboard. You will need to provide special permission to activate Cortana, much like when setting up Windows 10 desktop on PCs.
Creators Update will roll out starting on Tuesday.


text:
New Nixon tapes show more anti-Semitism
Published August 22, 2013
(JTA) — President Richard Nixon is heard in the last set of his White House tapes making anti-Semitic statements in discussions with visitors to the Oval Office and by telephone.
The 340 hours of tapes, which cover from April 9, 1973 to July 12, 1973, were released Wednesday by the Nixon Presidential Library. They are the last set of tapes that will be released by the library.
In a phone discussion in mid-April with Henry Kissinger, a Jew who at the time was the national security adviser, Nixon expresses concerns that Jews would torpedo an upcoming U.S.-Soviet summit. If that happened, Nixon said, "Let me say, Henry, it's gonna be the worst thing that happened to Jews in American history." He added, "If they torpedo this summit — and it might go down for other reasons — I'm gonna put the blame on them, and I'm going to do it publicly at 9 o'clock at night before 80 million people."
He continued: "They put the Jewish interest above America's interest, and it's about goddamn time that the Jew in America realizes he's an American first and a Jew second."
In a tape from May 1 that is labeled by the library as "Garment's Jewish background," referring to Nixon aide and lawyer Leonard Garment, Nixon is heard shouting "Goddamn his Jewish soul" after saying he wants to fire Garment for an inappropriate comment.
When asked about appointees, Nixon tells presidential counselor Anne Armstrong there should be "No Jews. We are adamant when I say no Jews. … But Mexicans are important. Italians, Eastern Europeans. That sort of thing."
Nixon accused the Jews of holding American foreign policy "hostage to Jewish emigration from the Soviet Union," and added that "the American people are not going to let them destroy our foreign policy — never!"
Future presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush are heard in conversations recorded on the tapes offering Nixon support during the Watergate affair.
Nixon on previous tapes was heard making anti-Semitic remarks about Jewish politicians and others.


text:
US Attorney Jeff Taylor was sweating on August 6, as he laid out his case against the late Dr. Bruce Ivins at a news conference-and with good reason. Anyone familiar with the case is well aware that Dr. Ivins was railroaded, and that the news conference was a flimsy web of lies.
Ivins had nothing to do with the 2001 anthrax attacks. The attacks were almost certainly carried out by the only group that had the means to produce the highly weaponized anthrax in the letters: the CIA, its contractor Battelle Memorial Institute of West Jefferson, Ohio., and the Army at Dugway in Utah.
The DOJ-FBI frame-up of Ivins rests heavily upon the claim of new advances in genetic testing which supposedly prove that the killer anthrax could have come only from Ivins' flask.
Jeff Taylor stated: 'The FBI sought out the best experts in the scientific community and, over time, four highly sensitive and specific tests were developed that were capable of detecting the unique qualities of the anthrax used in the 2001 attacks.'
This is an outright lie. No special tests were required to assess the genetic heritage of the Ames strain in the envelopes. The Washington Post reported on December 16, 2001 that 'only five laboratories so far have been found to have spores with perfect genetic matches to those in the Senate letters.'
The distinguishing feature of the anthrax that killed five people in 2001 is not related to its genes. What made that anthrax unique was that it was highly weaponized. Anthrax is a common pathogen found in the soil in many places. It doesn't become lethal unless produced in such a way that it behaves like a gas, floating easily in the air and deep into a victim's lungs.
The anthrax used in the attacks was beyond cutting edge. Donald A. Henderson, former assistant secretary for the Office of Public Health Preparedness at the Department of Health and Human Services, told Science magazine: 'It just didn't have to be that good' to be lethal.
Why the killer anthrax was so deadly
1. Precisely sized particles-1.5 to 5 microns. Anything smaller is exhaled, anything larger tends to get caught either in the nose or in the cilia in the trachea.
2. Coated with silica. The silica acted as a buffer, preventing spores from adhering to one another. The silica on the attack anthrax rested on a thin layer of polymerized glass, which is a highly advanced technique for coating anthrax spores. To do this required a 'spray dryer,' the cheapest of which sells for $50,000. The lyophilizer in Ivins' lab is used to dry anthrax, but can NOT be used to coat the spores with silica. Ivins did not have a spray dryer.
3. Highly concentrated. The letter to Senator Daschle's office contained two grams of anthrax, about the weight of a dime. Each gram contained a trillion pure spores of anthrax, or enough to kill 200 million people.
4. Electro-statically charged. The slight charge on each spore caused it to repel the other spores and spread out into the room after the envelope was opened.
It is these attributes of the anthrax-not its genetic heritage-which made it so unique and so lethal.
The source of the anthrax was clear in 2001
US Attorney Jeff Taylor characterized a flask in Dr. Ivin's possession as 'the murder weapon.' But a Dec. 12, 2001 article in the Baltimore Sun stated:
For nearly a decade, U.S. Army scientists at Dugway Proving Ground in Utah have made small quantities of weapons-grade anthrax that is virtually identical to the powdery spores used in the mail attacks that have killed five people.
The article refers to Dugway as 'the only site in the United States where weapons-grade anthrax has been made in recent years,' and also includes this:
Dugway's production of weapons-grade anthrax, which has never before been publicly revealed, is apparently the first by the U.S. government since President Richard M. Nixon ordered the U.S. offensive biowarfare program closed in 1969.
The following day, the Washington Post echoed the Sun article:
An Army biological and chemical warfare facility in Utah has been quietly developing a virulent, weapons-grade formulation of anthrax spores since at least 1992.
On Dec 16, 2001, the Washington Post corroborated the Sun report by stating that 'Dugway is the only facility known in recent years to have processed anthrax spores into the powdery form that is most easily inhaled,' also stating, 'Army officials in Washington said yesterday that Fort Detrick does not have the equipment for making dried anthrax spores.'
On September 4, 2001, the New York Times explained:
Over the past several years, the United States has embarked on a program of secret research on biological weapons … even the [Clinton] White House was unaware of their full scope. The projects, which have not been previously disclosed … have been embraced by the Bush administration, which intends to expand them.
These projects involve the CIA, Battelle Memorial Laboratories in West Jefferson, Ohio, and the Army at Dugway in Utah.
[T]he need to keep such projects secret was a significant reason behind President Bush's recent rejection of a draft agreement to strengthen the germ-weapons treaty, [the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention,] which has been signed by 143 nations.
Had the treaty been strengthened, the Dugway and West Jefferson sites would have been subject to international inspections. It is important to note that Battelle not only operates its own labs in West Jefferson, but also is contracted by the Army to operate the labs at Dugway.
The DOJ-FBI news conference on August 6, 2008 was a deliberate attempt to divert attention from the secret anthrax weaponization projects by pinning the crimes on a dead man. So far the DOJ-FBI have succeeded in covering up the real perpetrators of the crime, concealing the illegal weapons program, and persuading many that it is time to close the investigation.
Dr. Ivins was an immunologist; he had neither the knowledge nor the equipment to produce the silica-coated, electro-statically charged, 1.5 to 5 micron sized, one trillion spore per gram anthrax that was mailed to Senators Leahy and Daschle.
The DOJ has made much of the fact that Ivins worked 45 extra hours in September and October of 2001. Yet when the FBI attempted to reverse engineer the weaponized anthrax from the attacks, they admitted after a year of trying that they were unable to come up with a product as potent as that in the letters.
Scientists doubt FBI's story
As far back as October 28, 2002, the Washington Post reported that bio-weapons experts were skeptical about the view that the anthrax in the letters could have come from a lone nut:
'In my opinion, there are maybe four or five people in the whole country who might be able to make this stuff, and I'm one of them,' said Richard O. Spertzel, former deputy commander of USAMRIID (the Army bio-defense facility at Detrick). 'And even with a good lab and staff to help run it, it might take me a year to come up with a product as good.'
Writing in the New York Times on Aug. 9, 2008, Gerry Andrews, an assistant professor of microbiology at the University of Wyoming, described the envelopes' contents as:
"a startlingly refined weapons-grade anthrax spore preparation, the likes of which had never been seen before by personnel at Fort Detrick.' He continued: 'It is extremely improbable that this type of preparation could ever have been produced at Fort Detrick, certainly not of the grade and quality found in that envelope.'
Abundant evidence that Ivins is innocent
Ivins passed two polygraph tests and no link was made between his handwriting and that on the anthrax letters. Investigators were so frustrated at Ivins passing the polygraph tests that they searched his house for books or articles on how to fool a polygraph, but found none.
US Attorney Jeff Taylor stated that the investigators zeroed in on Ivins when they 'conducted additional investigative steps,' and thus were 'able to narrow the focus even further, exclude individuals, and that left us looking at Dr. Ivins.'
Those 'additional investigative steps' were polygraph tests. Where passing a polygraph test was enough to exclude certain people, it did not exclude Ivins.
Ivins' car, work locker, safe deposit box and house were thoroughly swabbed for anthrax spores multiple times over the space of years; not a single spore was found, although the killer anthrax was so highly weaponized that it behaved like a gas and was very difficult to contain.
None of the materials in the mailings were found at his house: not the tape, the envelopes, nor the pen used to write the letters. There isn't one piece of evidence placing him in New Jersey at the time the letters were mailed: not a credit card receipt, restaurant receipt, nor a witness.
On August 3, 2008, Glen Greenwald wrote in Salon:
It is so vital to emphasize that not a shred of evidence has yet been presented that the now-deceased Bruce Ivins played any role in the anthrax attacks, let alone that he was the sole or even primary culprit. Nonetheless, just as they did with Steven Hatfill, the media (with some notable and important exceptions) are reporting this case as though the matter is resolved.
Bruce Ivins: juggler, Red Cross volunteer, pianist
Jeff Taylor's case against Ivins rests heavily on claims that Ivins was mentally ill. If Ivins was truly so unhinged, why was he allowed to work with toxic substances? His security clearance was never revoked.
Certainly a brilliant homicidal serial killer who is determined to avoid detection would immediately get rid of the Ames strain with the incriminating genotype in his flask, if he had used it to make weaponized powder and kill five people. Yet seven years later, the same genotype was still in Ivins' lab!
The DOJ and FBI ask us to believe that Ivins launched the attacks because his vaccine research was not going well and he feared he might lose his job. It's just not a plausible motivation.
In 2003, Ivins received the Decoration for Exceptional Civilian Service: the highest award given to the Defense Department's civilian employees. He had been a respected scientist at USAMRIID for 35 years and had a very secure job.
Ivins had been married for 33 years. He played keyboard at his local church, he was a member of the American Red Cross, an avid juggler and founder of the Frederick Jugglers. He also played keyboards in a Celtic band and would often compose and play songs for coworkers who were moving to new jobs.
The FBI focused on him as a probable fall guy in 2006, and for two years was all over him, repeatedly questioning him, searching his home, car and office, and confronting him and his family in public with accusations that he had 'killed people.' His daughter was shown pictures of dead anthrax victims and told 'your father did this.' His son was promised $2.5 million and a sports car of his choice if he would implicate his father in the anthrax attacks. Who among us would not resort to drink, or drugs, or fantasies of revenge under those circumstances?
Who had the expertise to weaponize anthrax?
William C. Patrick III, and Ken Alibek.
William Patrick was the originator of the first anthrax weaponization process. He has five patents on anthrax weaponization and wrote a paper in 1999 setting out exactly what an anthrax attack by mail would look like.
Patrick's scenario is very similar to what actually happened in 2001. For example, he suggests no more than 2.5 grams of anthrax per envelope; the envelopes contained two grams. One footnote in his paper reveals 'we now have the ability to purify to one trillion spores per gram.' William Patrick was a consultant to the CIA, Battelle, the Army, the DIA and the FBI on bio-weapons.
Ken Alibek headed up the Soviet bio-weapon programs until defecting to the USA in 1992. He brought with him the technology that was key in the anthrax attacks: using polymerized glass to attach silica to the anthrax spores. He worked for Battelle Memorial Institute in the late 90s.
These men had to have been instrumental in developing the technology used in the 2001 anthrax attacks.
Who can control the FBI, DOJ and the media?
The significance of the railroading of the deceased Ivins cannot be overstated. This railroading is not a matter of incompetence. In detail after detail, the joint FBI-DOJ prosecution deliberately lies, evades and obfuscates in a desperate attempt to pin blame somewhere and close the case. (A transcript of the entire August 6 news conference is available on npr.org, titled 'DOJ News Conference On Bruce Ivins.')
US Attorney Jeff Taylor states at the news conference that the envelopes used in the attacks were 'very likely sold at a post office in the Frederick, Md. area,' and that Ivins had a post office box there. This is another outright lie. Taylor's own application for a search warrant stated:
[E]nvelopes with printing defects, identical to printing defects identified on the envelopes utilized in the anthrax attacks during the fall of 2001, were collected from the Fairfax Main post office in Fairfax, Virginia, and the Cumberland and Elkton post offices in Maryland.
Taylor and his supervisors at DOJ must be hoping that no one will notice or care that they are blatantly lying about their evidence against Ivins.
Reading the transcript, it is striking how often Jeff Taylor and Joseph Persichini refuse to answer questions. They either refer reporters to the Department of Defense (which is not holding a news conference) or to the documents they have been given.
When asked when their all new, ground-breaking DNA research would be published, Taylor replies 'I'm not going to comment on (that).' When asked a direct question about how many others were investigated other than Ivins, Taylor replies, 'I'm not going to get into the details.' Not only does he not get into the details, he doesn't even give us the broad strokes. When asked how he can be so sure that there wasn't another person involved, Taylor replies:
The evidence I described in my statement, and that I've described throughout this question-and-answer period, as I said, led us to conclude that Dr. Ivins is the person who committed this crime. We are confident, based on the evidence we have, that we could prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt.
In other words, he doesn't answer.
Honest citizens must ask themselves: who are the FBI and DOJ protecting? Who has the ability to control and corrupt an investigation of this importance? And why, after sitting through a news conference that is obviously a hastily constructed web of lies, have so many journalists dutifully reported the story just as instructed by Jeff Taylor?
We no longer have a working government in the United States. What we have are functionaries in various departments-Congress, FBI, DOJ, CIA-who take their orders from the corporations who make vast sums of money waging war and selling vaccines. Their influence extends to the major media outlets who control the flow of information to the American people. We are increasingly enslaved, manipulated and murdered by these corporations, and very few of us seem to realize it.


text:
Alberta energy regulator shutting off discussions, critics say
Regulator only obliged to allow those 'directly and adversly affected' to speak at hearings
Critics say Albertans are in danger of being shut out of discussions on how the province's natural resources are developed.
Expert observers and opposition politicians worry Alberta's new energy regulator is drawing the circle of who can speak so tightly that one hearing on a proposed energy project had to be cancelled because no one was allowed to appear.
"They have not widened the circle at all," said Nigel Bankes, a professor of resource law at the University of Calgary.
"I think it sends the overall message that [they're] not really interested in public review."
The Alberta Energy Regulator is responsible both for holding public hearings on oilsands proposals and other energy developments and for determining who has the right to appear.
The regulator is obliged to allow only those "directly and adversely affected" to appear.
Lately, it has taken that language too far, said Liberal legislature member Laurie Blakeman.
"Unless you live across the road — literally, across the road — you're not going to get standing."
First Nations, coalitions denied chance to speak
Bankes and Blakeman point to a recent decision concerning a public hearing scheduled for Canadian Natural Resources Ltd.'s (TSX:CNQ) Kirby oilsands expansion proposal.
Seven First Nations, one individual and one environmental coalition applied for permission to speak. Three of the applicants later withdrew their requests. Of the six remaining, not one met the regulator's criteria.
The hearing into an 85,000-barrel-a-day project was simply cancelled.
"The panel has in fact determined that none of the parties that filed a submission in response to the notice of hearing will be permitted to participate in a hearing and therefore the AER will not be scheduling a hearing," the regulator wrote to one of the applicants on March 27.
Last fall, two aboriginal groups were also denied standing to appear at public hearings on proposed oilsands developments adjacent to their traditional lands.
Decisions on who has the right to speak are not made public.
The regulator has reversed some earlier decisions made by Alberta Environment. It gave the Oilsands Environmental Coalition permission to speak at a Southern Pacific Resources hearing after the group — which includes the Pembina Institute and the Fort McMurray Environmental Coalition — was turned down a second time by the government.
Alberta Energy Regulator spokesman Peter Murchland said the agency makes judgments on a case-by-case basis.
"AER hearings provide a level playing field for all participants and are open to the public to observe," he said.
"Submissions to participate in hearings are assessed depending on a number of criteria including whether or not an energy project directly and adversely affects them."
Regulator 'closing its mind?'
Blakeman said decisions such as what happened with the Kirby project ignore important realities.
"The government seems to believe that the air doesn't move, water doesn't flow and soil doesn't leach," she said.
"There's nothing wrong with making a process move faster or more efficiently. There is something very wrong with it when they design a process that essentially prohibits any other consideration from being on the table."
The position of the regulator and the government appears to conflict with recent Supreme Court rulings, said Bankes.
"The Supreme Court has moved in favour of recognizing what's referred to as public interest standing. If ... you can show that there's a serious issue to be talked about, that there's no other obvious person to raise the issue, then the court can give you standing.
"That's the sort of discretion the AER should be able to exercise. Instead, what it's doing is closing its mind."


text:
Breaking down Louisville and Notre Dame's 5OT thriller
- Notre Dame overcame an eight-point deficit in regulation to win 104-101
- The game spanned for over 3 hours and 40 minutes
- Grant leads 12-4 Irish rally in final moments
Notre Dame coach Mike Brey said his team's thrilling 104-101 victory over Louisville in five overtimes sadly "only counts as one Big East win."
It felt like much more than one game Saturday night.
The Irish (19-5, 7-6 Big East) and Cardinals (19-5, 7-4) staged one of the most exciting games in college basketball this season, spanning 3 hours and 40 minutes and rivaling a six-overtime Big East clash between Syracuse and Connecticut in 2009. It was the longest Big East game in regular-season history.
"We got over 100 because we played an extra game," Brey said on ESPN after the game. "We were having fun. It was awesome."
Indeed. Both teams essentially played two games. The first half of regulation was merely an appetizer for the the five-overtime main course. Here's a breakdown of all the action:
Star of the game: Garrick Sherman. The junior center, who transferred from Michigan State, didn't see the floor until ND star Jack Cooley and Tom Knight fouled out and went on to score 17 points on 7-for-10 shooting in the five overtimes. "I'm still trying to digest it," he said after the game. "I had to step up for my team."
Stunning end of regulation: It didn't look as if the Cardinals were going to need overtime when Louisville's Chane Behanan made a free throw with 51 seconds left in regulation to make it 56-48. But Jerian Grant led the Irish on a 12-4 comeback, hitting three consecutive 3-pointers and then tying it on a three-point play with 16 seconds left. The Cardinals had a chance to win, but they never got a shot off as Siva lost control of the ball under the basket in the closing seconds.
First overtime: Both teams missed chances to win in this extra period. Behanan blocked a shot inside by Notre Dame's Eric Atkins with 15 seconds left before Louisville's Russ Smith missed from 3-point range in the closing seconds for the Cardinals. Grant, who led the Irish with 19 points, fouled out with 1:57 left in this overtime.
Second overtime: With 16 seconds left in the second overtime, Cameron Biedscheid hit a 3-pointer to force another period.
Third overtime: Chane Behanan scored inside with 16 seconds to go to tie it at 83.
Fourth overtime: Atkins and Zach Auguste missed shots for the Irish, but Sherman tipped in the rebound to tie the score at 93 with 5 seconds left. Smith had a last-second shot for the Cardinals but missed.
Fifth overtime: Cameron Biedscheid scored on a layup with 1:19 left, and Atkins and Pat Connaugton added free throws in the final 19 seconds. Smith had a chance to tie it, but his 3-point attempt missed before Notre Dame students flooded the court to celebrate.
Louisville's star: Behanan had 30 points and 15 rebounds for Louisville.
Fun fact: The lead changed 26 times, and the score was tied 16 times.


text:
It's ages since I participated in the 52 Weeks of Abundant Genealogy by Amy Coffin and hosted by Geneabloggers as I've been rather preoccupied with my own 52 weeks Beyond the Internet series.
This morning I read that the topic for Week 42 of Abundant Genealogy is Biggest Genealogy Accomplishment. What do you feel is your biggest genealogy accomplishment? What were the steps you took to get there, and what was the end result?
My first thoughts turned to an earlier Abundant Genealogy post from Week 7 when I wrote about discovering my Bavarian ancestor's roots. It was only later that I thought, no that's not my biggest genealogy accomplishment, even though it was certainly a critical point in my family research.
The thing I'm most proud of, genealogically, is writing the history of my Kunkel family in Queensland: a pioneering family who, although not important as individuals, participated in important events in our country's and our state's achievements and progress. It was the family's everyday ordinariness that gave me the name of the book: Grassroots Queenslanders: the Kunkel Family.
Thanks to the discovery I mentioned above, and fantastic oral history connections that were uncovered, I was able to include the background story of my Happ-Kunkel families in Bavaria and my O'Brien ancestors from Ballykelly near Broadford in Co Clare, and a little about the other emigrants from Dorfprozelten in Bavaria.
I knew literally nothing about this family when I started out other than the fact Kunkel was plainly a name of German origin, and that my grandfather had several siblings only one or two of whom he had anything to do with. I also knew that he had originally been a Catholic and one of the points of contention had been his marrying a Scots Presbyterian.
My research started in the pre-internet era so I accumulated every snippet of information I could find from as many sources as possible. One day I realised that if I didn't write up this family story, it would become a major regret.
So what did I do? One of the strange things I did was to decide not to look at other family histories because I didn't want to pinch their ideas. In retrospect this was fairly silly as there are so many strategies that can be used – you don't have to recreate the wheel. Instead I launched in, started writing and kept at it, day after day, until the story came together. I was still working full-time so I wrote in the early mornings and late into the evenings.
As I found gaps in the story I chased down more clues, did more research, and phoned more people. I'm proud of all the research, determination and sheer persistence that went into writing up this story, including challenging my reluctance to contact formerly unknown relatives.
Like the Oscars I have to acknowledge that many people helped me along the way with their stories, photos etc, but my greatest debt is to Mr Cassmob, who got a Family Knighthood for Services to Genealogy! I've said many times, either the book wouldn't have been written or I'd have been much thinner.
When I first held my "baby" in my hands I was just so thrilled and besotted. Now of course I can see its flaws, mistakes, and things I could have done differently, but even so it was, and remains, an achievement to be proud of.
The book was launched by one of my distant O'Brien cousins, who always tells me "oh you're wonderful" but what she really means is that I'm quite mad to keep doing all this family history. We launched the book in Toowoomba not far from where the family had lived for many years and as far as is known it was the first Kunkel family reunion in close to 100 years.
It was a great day and there was a non-step level of chatter even among people who'd never met before. Many were astonished to discover they had Kunkel ancestry and everyone appreciated learning more of the story. The genealogy chart stretched along the walls and everybody had fun finding their name. Another great thing, retrospectively, is that quite a number of the third generation of Kunkel descendants were able to attend even though in their eighties or nineties Many have now left us so it was a special privilege to have them there. The reunion and all the pleasure people got from it and from the book was definitely the icing on the cake.
The glitter on the cake was winning two awards for the book. I was so proud to be joint-winner of Queensland Family History Society's annual award with Joyce Philips's book The Wrights of Tivoli. And then to my utter astonishment I also won the Alexander Henderson Award from the Australian Institute of Genealogical Studies. I was over the moon with excitement and pride as you might imagine.
It's very counter-cultural to blow one's own trumpet, certainly in Australia where there's an absolute dislike of people who puff themselves up, so it feels very brazen to be telling this story.
There's something special about knowing you're leaving a family history for posterity and that you've opened up your family's story to many family members. It's certainly one of my proudest moments. So if you've been thinking of writing your own family history, give it a go and don't let the fear stop you. I guarantee you will be so pleased to have provided this inheritance for generations to come.


text:
Money and Life
(Financial Planning Association of Australia)
International research shows leaving work early may not be so good for your life expectancy. We bring you a checklist of things to consider before you leave work and ride off into the sunset for your happily ever after.
Retire early for a longer life?
If you've already squirreled away enough super for an early retirement, it's probably pretty high on your list of priorities. But money isn't the only thing that's going to help you enjoy retirement for longer. What if you knew that retiring early could actually mean dying sooner?
New research from Maria Fitzpatrick of Cornell University and Timothy Moore of the University of Melbourne shows an alarming leap in mortality rates for US citizens who retire and start claiming their social security payments as soon as they're eligible – from the age of 62. The study concluded that retiring at this stage in their lives "may have an immediate, negative impact" on their health. This is particularly the case for men, who can expect a 20% increase in their mortality risk1. The flaw in these figures, as acknowledged by Fitzpatrick and Moore, is that existing health problems may be a trigger for many people to hurry up and retire. This could go some way to explaining why an earlier death is more likely for this retirement cohort.
Another study from the US classifies the health status of research subjects to make sure this doesn't skew their results. Of 2956 retirees taking part in the Healthy Retirement Study, about two thirds considered themselves healthy and their decision to retire wasn't motivated by poor health. During the 18-year period after retirement, 12% of the healthy group and 25.6% of the unhealthy group died. Compared with outcomes for a group who retired a year later after turning 65, mortality risk was 11% lower for healthy retirees and 9% lower for the unhealthy group2.
Embrace a lifestyle change
If you're determined to retire early but want to safeguard your health, what's the answer? According to Chenkai Wu, lead author of the Healthy Retirement Study, replacing the 9-5 with new commitments could be the answer. "Keeping active and getting involved in voluntary work definitely brings retirees a lot of benefits that would have been brought about by keeping on working," says Wu3.
Research from closer to home seems to confirm this tip for a longer life in retirement. A University of Sydney research study shows that, in many cases, retirement generally leads to healthier lifestyle habits. The data gathered by Dr. Ding, Senior Research Fellow at the University's School of Public Health, and her team shows that retirees were doing 93 more minutes of physical activity per week compared with their peers still in employment. They also sleep for 11 minutes longer. Perhaps the best outcome is that 50% of female smokers quit after retiring. "A major life change like retirement creates a great window of opportunity to make positive lifestyle changes," says Dr. Ding. "It's a chance to get rid of bad routines and engineer new, healthier behaviours."4
Early retirement checklist
So the trade-off between an early exit from work and shortening your life seems to be making a commitment to keeping active. Here are some other things to think about when you're planning for your best – and healthiest – life in retirement:
- Sharing retirement – if your partner continues to work when you retire will you be happy and keeping busy on your own? If friends are continuing to work too, it's important to have a plan for making some new ones. Aim to start your retirement with a strong social network so you can continue to have a sense of connection to the world around you.
- Volunteering/part-time work – volunteering in your local community or working in a part-time role are both good ways to give your new lifestyle some structure, help you meet new people and feel valued. Doing something you're passionate about – like coaching, supporting a charity or turning a hobby into a business – can be a very rewarding way to spend time in retirement.
- Making a move – when you're no longer tied to a location by work, the world is your oyster! Downsizing your home or relocating could be an important part of your retirement plan. Before making the move, do some research to check that a sea change will bring you into contact with the social groups and activities you're looking forward to enjoying in retirement.
- Looking after family – if you have family living locally who rely on you for care and support, you'll probably be staying put. Caring for grandchildren can be very rewarding of course, but be mindful of having time to look after your own needs and enjoy your own interests, particularly if you're in the sandwich generation and looking after elderly parents too.
Looking forward to an early retirement? Get tips from a financial planner on how to prepare yourself for the changes to your finances and lifestyle.
1 Bloomberg, Retiring Early Just Might Kill You, Says New Research, Christopher Condon, 19 December 2017
2 The Guardian, Does early retirement mean an early death?, Luisa Dillner, 2 May 2016https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/may/02/early-earlier-retirement-retire-death-risk-data-research-jobs
3 The Guardian, Does early retirement mean an early death?, Luisa Dillner, 2 May 2016https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/may/02/early-earlier-retirement-retire-death-risk-data-research-jobs
4 University of Sydney, Retirement is good for your health, 14 March 2016,https://sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2016/03/14/retirement-is-good-for-your-health.html


text:
By Jenifer Fenton, reporting for CNN from Abu Dhabi, UAE
In the summer of 2001, Fayiz Mohammed Ahmed Al Kandari, the eldest son of a large family, left Kuwait to travel to Afghanistan. His stated purpose was to do charitable work, assisting with the reconstruction of two wells and the repair of a mosque.
His trip was for the sake of his mother who had cancer so there would be "more blessings from God on her behalf," according to a member of the Al Kandari family. He had traveled to Afghanistan before on charitable work in 1997 - and to Bosnia in 1994.
But this visit would end up with a much longer and unintended journey - to Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. Nearly 10 years later, Al Kandari remains incarcerated at the U.S. detention facility. And his case illustrates the difficulties of establishing who may have had links with al Qaeda and similar groups in the chaotic aftermath of 9/11, the strength of evidence against them, and whether they might remain or become a threat today if freed from detention.
Kuwait is an important U.S. ally in the Gulf: During the first Gulf War in the early 1990s, the U.S. led the counteroffensive that pushed Saddam Hussein's invading Iraqi forces out of Kuwait, and Kuwait allowed U.S. troops to enter Iraq from its territory during the 2003 invasion.
According to his passport Al Kandari left Kuwait at the end of June 2001. He traveled to Pakistan, where he stayed for two months and then he traveled on to Afghanistan, according to legal transcripts.
Lt. Col. Barry Wingard is defending Al Kandari before the military commission that is hearing his case at Guantanamo Bay. He says that after the 9/11 attacks, Al Kandari remembers leaflets falling all around him. On the leaflet there was a picture of an Afghan man, who was holding a bag of money. The leaflet read, "You turn in your Arabs and we will give you money."
Local Afghan officials advised Al Kandari to leave, according to Wingard. But in October 2001, he was captured by the Northern Alliance - along with many other Arabs - and "sold" to U.S. forces in Afghanistan, Wingard said.
Prosecutors say the story about Al Kandari's charitable work is not true. Al Kandari is accused of giving material support to terrorism and conspiracy to materially support terrorism.
A September 2004 Combatant Status Review Board said: "The detainee (Al Kandari) recruited personnel to participate in jihad in Afghanistan ... traveled into Afghanistan and received weapons training at the Khaldan training camp. Osama bin Laden personally provided religious instruction and trainee (sic) at this camp." The Board concluded Al Kandari was a member of al Qaeda and "the detainee was in the Tora Bora mountain region in October or November 2001."
Al Kandari, now 36, has always denied the accusations. According to legal transcripts, he said: "I looked at all the unclassified accusations; I was laughing so hard."
He said he'd been accused of fighting with the Taliban and al Qaeda and that he'd spent most of his time in Afghanistan alongside Osama bin Laden.
"All this happened in a period of three months ... I ask, 'Are these accusations against Faiz or against Superman?' It seems to me that whoever wrote these accusations he must (have) been drinking and he must have been drunk when he wrote it."
Moazzam Begg, a British Muslim who was also held at Guantanamo, says Al Kandari was taken to an American detention center in Kandahar. Begg told CNN he remembered Al Kandari from Kandahar because the Americans would bring him from cell to cell to collect trash.
Begg says others in the detention center told him Al Kandari was knowledgeable about Islamic issues. Begg was transferred to Bagram Air Force Base and then to Guantanamo and says he never saw Al Kandari again. But he says he never heard another detainee say anything about Al Kandari being associated with known terrorists or terrorists activities.
Al Kandari's friends and relatives also insist he never had any affiliation with terrorist organizations, according to legal documents. Despite years of interrogations, Al Kandari has maintained his innocence, Wingard said.
Al Kandari is only allowed a phone call to his family every several months. His mother, Fatima Yusuf, is still alive, 10 years after Al Kandari left for Afghanistan.
"I have lost my son for years and I am longing for him," she wrote in testimony for her son. Al Kandari "used to divide his daily pocket expenses into two halves, one for him and he used to distribute the other half to the poor. Sometimes, he spent his whole pocket expenses to the needy, without withholding anything for him."
Presently, Al Kandari is not making the calls to his family because he has been locked in solitary confinement for going on a hunger strike after his personal belongings, including his mail, was taken, according to his Wingard, his lawyer.
Al Kandari is one of two remaining Kuwaiti detainees. Ten Kuwaiti detainees have been released from Guantanamo.
At its peak, Guantanamo held at least 779 men. But over the years some 600 men have been sent to their country of origin or to a country willing to take them. There are now fewer than 200 held at the facility. Some are likely to be released, but in March, U.S. President Barack Obama signed an executive order that allows for "indefinite detention" with periodic reviews for dozens of detainees. The Obama administration also announced that military commission trials against other detainees will resume. President Obama had previously signed an executive order in 2009 promising to close the detention facility within a year.
Al Kandari, his lawyers believe, is likely to be indefinitely detained. "Forty-eight unfortunate souls in Guantanamo Bay will never get a trial, will be presumed guilty and will die in Guantanamo without ever having stepped into a courtroom," Wingard said. Al Kandari has an appeal before the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, but David Cynamon, the lead attorney for the Kuwaiti detainees at Guantanamo Bay Prison, believes that the court is a "black hole" for the detainees.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal from another Kuwaiti - Fawzi Al Odah - challenging his indefinite detention. Al Odah, who Cynamon represents, also claims he was traveling to the Pakistan-Afghanistan region in 2001 to teach and for charity work.
According to Al Odah's combatant status review board in 2004, Al Odah was associated with al Qaeda and the Taliban. Additionally, "The detainee admits carrying an AK-47 through the Tora Bora mountains for 10 to 11 days during the U.S. air campaign in that region."
Al Odah, now 34, has maintained his innocence throughout his detention. His father Khalid Al Odah told CNN that he was carrying a weapon when he was detained, but only for for self defense.
The difficulty with the Guantanamo cases is the government relies on hearsay, Cynamon said. There is no way of "testing the truthfulness of the people making the allegations."
According to diplomatic cables from the U.S. Embassy in 2009, published by WikiLeaks, the U.S. Ambassador in Kuwait dismissed the Kuwaiti detainees "as nasty, unrepentant individuals" and added: "Kuwait's record had been tarnished by the example of former GTMO detainee al-Ajmi, who'd allegedly (blew) himself up in Mosul following his release to the Kuwaiti authorities."
Kuwait's Minister of Interior Sheikh Jaber al-Khalid Al Sabah noted according to the same cable: "We are not Saudi Arabia; we cannot isolate these people in desert camps or somewhere on an island. We cannot compel them to stay. If they are rotten, they are rotten and the best thing to do is get rid of them. You picked them up in Afghanistan; you should drop them off in Afghanistan, in the middle of the war zone."
Adel Abdul Hadi, one of Al Kandari's defense lawyers, said of Sheikh al Sabah's comments: "Those charged with having Fayiz (Al Kandari) and Fawzi (Al Odah) returned were actually suggesting they be murdered instead (of) being returned to Kuwait."
The nine other Kuwaiti detainees who have been repatriated to Kuwait between 2005 and 2009 have reintegrated well said Khalid Al Odah, who works with the Kuwait Family Committee, which lobbies on behalf of the remaining Kuwaiti prisoners in Guantanamo. "They are productive. Some have children, they are working and we are in contact with them all the time," Khalid Al Odah said.
Fouad Mahmoud Al Rabiah was the last Kuwaiti detainee released from Guantanamo in December 2009. In his case a U.S. District Court concluded at the time that Al Rabiah's uncorroborated confessions, which his counsel attributed to abuse and coercion, were "not credible or reliable, and that the Government has failed to provide the Court with sufficiently credible and reliable evidence to meet its burden of persuasion. If there exists a basis for Al Rabiah's indefinite detention, it most certainly has not been presented to this Court." His petition for habeas corpus was granted.
Al Rabiah was repatriated to Kuwait where he was supposed to live in a rehabilitation center, according to Cynamon, his lawyer. But after a few days of interrogation, the Kuwaiti authorities decided there was no case against Al Rabiah and they allowed him to go free.
If Al Kandari and Al Odah were released they would be sent to a rehabilitation center in Kuwait's central prison, Khalid Al Odah said. They would not be allowed to leave the country and they would be under surveillance, Khalid Al Odah said.
Khalid Al Odah said his son may have lost his legal battle, but "Kuwait has other cards to play with."
On May 18, Kuwait's parliament descended into a brawl during a debate about the fate of Al Kandari and Al Odah. According to press reports, a Shiite MP referred to the Kuwait detainees as "al Qaeda" militants. That provoked an argument with a Muslim Brotherhood MP - and blows were exchanged - leading Assembly Speaker Jassem Al-Kharafi to suspend the session.
The majority of Kuwaiti MPs and thousands of others have signed a petition asking the U.S. to give the Kuwaiti detainees a fair trial or release them.
Kuwaiti MP Rola Al-Dashti said it was impossible to know if Al Kandari was guilty or innocent: "I don't see a fair trial ... nobody knows why the U.S. is keeping them," she said, referring to Al Kandari and Al Odah. It is very important to the people of Kuwait and to the families of the detainees that the U.S. abide by democratic principles, she said. "It doesn't look good to look into the U.S. and see this kind of practice."
Al Odah's father Khalid said "Ten years is long enough to keep them without a trial."
The recently departed U.S. Ambassador to Kuwait Deborah Jones, who was serving in her post when the WikiLeaks cables were allegedly sent, said the remaining two Kuwaiti detainees in Guantanamo represent a threat to both the U.S. and Kuwait, according to Kuwaiti press reports. (The U.S. embassy in Kuwait declined to comment on the remarks or provide a transcript of the ambassador's press event in which the comments were reportedly made).
Al Kandari has maintained that after finishing the repairs on the mosque back in 2001, he placed a plaque there. His defense team are still trying to trace that mosque. Adel Abdul Hadi, his lawyer, says that "if found, it will be yet more proof that U.S. intelligence is again wrong."
Hello there! I could have sworn Iíve visited this web site before but after going through some of the articles I realized itís new to me. Anyways, Iím certainly pleased I stumbled upon it and Iíll be bookmarking it and checking back regularly!
Very good article. I definitely appreciate this website. Keep writing!
You have made some good points there. I checked on the internet to learn more about the issue and found most individuals will go along with your views on this site.
Aw, this was an incredibly good post. Taking the time and actual effort to create a top notch articleÖ but what can I sayÖ I hesitate a lot and don't seem to get nearly anything done.
This site really has all of the information I wanted about this subject and didnít know who to ask.
Hello! I just want to offer you a huge thumbs up for your great information you have here on this post. I'll be returning to your site for more soon.
Good information. Lucky me I found your website by chance (stumbleupon). I have book-marked it for later!
Saved as a favorite, I really like your site!
Everything is very open with a really clear description of the challenges. It was truly informative. Your site is useful. Many thanks for sharing!
bookmarked!!, I like your site!
Your style is very unique compared to other folks I have read stuff from. Thank you for posting when you've got the opportunity, Guess I'll just book mark this blog.
Good post! We will be linking to this great article on our website. Keep up the good writing.
Hi there! I could have sworn Iíve visited your blog before but after looking at many of the posts I realized itís new to me. Anyways, Iím certainly delighted I came across it and Iíll be bookmarking it and checking back often!
Howdy, I think your web site could possibly be having web browser compatibility issues. Whenever I take a look at your website in Safari, it looks fine but when opening in Internet Explorer, it's got some overlapping issues. I simply wanted to give you a quick heads up! Apart from that, fantastic site!
Greetings! Very helpful advice in this particular post! It's the little changes that produce the largest changes. Thanks for sharing!
This is a topic that's close to my heart... Take care! Where are your contact details though?
Very nice post. I definitely love this website. Keep writing!
Hi there, I do think your site may be having browser compatibility issues. When I take a look at your website in Safari, it looks fine however when opening in I.E., it has some overlapping issues. I simply wanted to provide you with a quick heads up! Besides that, great website!
Hi! I could have sworn Iíve been to this web site before but after browsing through some of the posts I realized itís new to me. Anyways, Iím definitely pleased I found it and Iíll be book-marking it and checking back regularly!
Great article. I'm dealing with some of these issues as well..
Oh my goodness! Amazing article dude! Thank you, However I am having troubles with your RSS. I donít understand why I cannot join it. Is there anyone else having identical RSS problems? Anybody who knows the answer will you kindly respond? Thanks!!
A motivating discussion is definitely worth comment. I do think that you need to publish more on this subject, it might not be a taboo subject but generally people do not discuss such subjects. To the next! Best wishes!!
I was more than happy to discover this web site. I want to to thank you for ones time just for this fantastic read!! I definitely really liked every bit of it and i also have you book-marked to see new stuff on your web site.
Everything is very open with a very clear explanation of the issues. It was really informative. Your website is extremely helpful. Many thanks for sharing!
Good post. I learn something totally new and challenging on sites I stumbleupon every day. It's always helpful to read articles from other writers and practice something from their websites.
You should take part in a contest for one of the highest quality sites on the net. I am going to highly recommend this site!
I have to thank you for the efforts you've put in writing this blog. I am hoping to check out the same high-grade content by you in the future as well. In truth, your creative writing abilities has motivated me to get my own, personal blog now 😉
how to get cialis online viagra cialis levitra where can i buy cialis 20mg
Good article! We are linking to this particularly great post on our website. Keep up the great writing.
This is the perfect website for anyone who would like to understand this topic. You know a whole lot its almost tough to argue with you (not that I really will need toÖHaHa). You definitely put a brand new spin on a subject that's been discussed for many years. Wonderful stuff, just great!
prescription for cialis purchase cialis shop online is cialis generic yet
Atacand pharmacy rx world.com reliable canadian pharmacy discount code
Everything is very open with a precise description of the challenges. It was really informative. Your website is useful. Many thanks for sharing!
which is better cialis or viagra ebay cialis generic cialis pricing
Your style is really unique in comparison to other folks I've read stuff from. I appreciate you for posting when you've got the opportunity, Guess I'll just book mark this blog.
You've made some decent points there. I looked on the net to learn more about the issue and found most individuals will go along with your views on this web site.
The very next time I read a blog, Hopefully it won't disappoint me just as much as this particular one. After all, Yes, it was my choice to read, but I truly thought you would probably have something helpful to say. All I hear is a bunch of whining about something that you can fix if you weren't too busy seeking attention.
http://www.go.onelink.me/v1xd?pid=Patch&c=Mobile Footer&af_web_dp=http://www.bjsnearme.com
An impressive share! I've just forwarded this onto a colleague who had been conducting a little homework on this. And he actually bought me breakfast because I found it for him... lol. So allow me to reword this.... Thanks for the meal!! But yeah, thanks for spending some time to discuss this subject here on your web site.
walmart store number pharmacy 1st rx pharmacy buying prescription drugs from canada online
plaquenil hydroxychloroquine sulfate chloroquine new zealand plaquenil 200 mg twice a day
You are so awesome! I do not believe I've read anything like that before. So good to find another person with a few original thoughts on this subject matter. Seriously.. thank you for starting this up. This site is something that is needed on the web, someone with some originality!
Greetings! Very useful advice in this particular article! It's the little changes that will make the largest changes. Thanks a lot for sharing!
An outstanding share! I've just forwarded this onto a friend who was doing a little homework on this. And he actually bought me dinner simply because I found it for him... lol. So let me reword this.... Thank YOU for the meal!! But yeah, thanks for spending time to talk about this issue here on your web page.
A fascinating discussion is definitely worth comment. There's no doubt that that you should publish more on this issue, it may not be a taboo matter but generally people don't discuss these subjects. To the next! Best wishes!!
Iím impressed, I must say. Seldom do I come across a blog thatís both educative and engaging, and let me tell you, you have hit the nail on the head. The issue is something that too few men and women are speaking intelligently about. I'm very happy I stumbled across this in my search for something regarding this.
You've made some good points there. I looked on the net to find out more about the issue and found most people will go along with your views on this website.
Hello! I just wish to offer you a big thumbs up for your great info you have got right here on this post. I'll be returning to your website for more soon.
Excellent article. I absolutely appreciate this site. Continue the good work!
May I simply just say what a relief to discover someone that genuinely knows what they are talking about online. You certainly understand how to bring an issue to light and make it important. More and more people need to check this out and understand this side of your story. I was surprised you aren't more popular because you definitely possess the gift.
I could not refrain from commenting. Exceptionally well written!
Spot on with this write-up, I absolutely believe that this site needs far more attention. Iíll probably be back again to read more, thanks for the information!
After going over a few of the blog posts on your blog, I honestly like your technique of blogging. I saved it to my bookmark website list and will be checking back soon. Please visit my website as well and let me know how you feel.
pharmacy online cialis cialis super active plus reviews cialis 800 black canada
online canadian pharmacy phentermine prescription drug pharmacy canada school
I could not resist commenting. Perfectly written!
Very good post. I absolutely appreciate this website. Keep writing!
You should be a part of a contest for one of the finest blogs online. I will recommend this site!
Good post. I learn something totally new and challenging on blogs I stumbleupon everyday. It will always be helpful to read through articles from other writers and use a little something from their web sites.
cialis black cialis 20mg prices whats better cialis or viagra
Nice post. I learn something new and challenging on sites I stumbleupon everyday. It will always be useful to read articles from other writers and practice a little something from their web sites.
canadian colleges of clinical pharmacy cvs pharmacy store manager salary canadian neighbor pharmacy reviews
cialis generic vs brand best place to buy generic cialis cialis reliable sites


text:
View Quick Ship Items
View Quick Ship Items Since 1980 Free Shipping*
Your Cart Is Empty
Item ID: 6844
notify me
In Stock
• Suitable for indoor/outdoor use• Stackable up to 8 high• Approved for commercial use• Industrial style in multiple colors• Drain holes in the seat
The Isabella Side Chair in Black Antique Gold finish is a popular, bistro-style powder-coated steel dining chair that is as versatile as it is classic. Available in a wide variety of colors, this modern dining chair is stackable up to 8 chairs high for easy storage, they are suitable for indoor/outdoor use with drain holes in the seat and they have a comfortable curved back. Isabella is suitable for commercial use and supports up to 330 lbs. The lightweight design, cross brace for added stability and protective floor glides make it the ideal choice for your dining room, patio or office lunchroom.


text:
I'm on a bit of a spaghetti squash kick now, and I think I even might try to grow them in my garden next year. I like the texture of it, and that the flavor isn't overpowering. It certainly lends itself well to using it like you would any pasta in a casserole or just with a good tomato sauce on top. However, this recipe is my favorite of all the things I've tried with it yet, so I hope you enjoy it, too!
It's based on this recipe, but I used several of the suggestions in the comments to modify it. Also, I skipped the bread cube topping since I'm taking a month off of wheat and gluten.
You will need:
1 tablespoon olive oil
1 medium onion, diced
6-8 oz of sliced fresh mushrooms (We've used crimini mushrooms and baby portobellos, both of which were delicious!)
About 2 cups of fresh spinach
2 cloves garlic, minced or pressed
½ teaspoon ground black pepper
1 teaspoon dried basil
¾ cup sour cream
½ cup shaved Parmesan/Asiago/Romano cheese blend, plus a little grated Parmesan for the top (I found that delicious cheese blend at the grocery the day I made this, otherwise I would've just used Parmesan and maybe a little mozzarella)
- Preheat oven to 400°F.
- Cook the squash. You can bake it on a baking sheet in the preheated oven for about 40 minutes to an hour. Or, if you don't have an extra hour to do this, you can cook the squash in the microwave (this is what I did), cut-side down in about half an inch of water for about 10 minutes or so:
- Shred the squash with a fork once cooled slightly:
- Transfer to a lightly oiled casserole dish, discarding shell.
- Heat olive oil in a skillet over medium heat. Cook and stir the onions, mushrooms, spinach, garlic, basil, and pepper until onions are translucent and tender and spinach is cooked:
- Stir onion mixture, sour cream, and cheese mixture into the squash until well mixed. Sprinkle Parmesan cheese on top of all of it.
- Bake in the preheated oven for 20 minutes, or until warmed through and top is lightly browned.
- Serve hot!


text:
Considering how many iconic gadgets emerged in the 2000s, it's no surprise that some ended up being overlooked and, in hindsight, should have been a lot more popular than they were. In an era that brought tech consumers like the
The best immersion blenders you can buy in 2023
All products recommended by Engadget are selected by our editorial team, independent of our parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission. All prices