text:
Title: Challenge To ALL Evangelical Christians Who Are About To Vote For Mitt Romney As "The Lesser of Two Evils".
Resources to aid your Understanding
Learn how to protect yourself, your loved ones!
Stand by for insights so startling you will never look at the news the same way again.
Copyright © 2012 Cutting Edge Ministries. All rights reserved. See full copyright notice below.
The Apostle John was warning believers of his day to avoid people who believe a false doctrine, who follow a different Jesus and a teach a different plan of salvation.
"Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God ... If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds." (2 John 1:9-11; Parallel Bible, KJV/Amplified Bible Commentary)
I think this is one of the most troubling verses in the entire Bible. John is starkly warning Christians not to fraternize with anyone who does not hold to the correct doctrine of Jesus Christ. By definition, these people are pagans. They worship other gods and they practice rituals other than Christian and they are literally worshipping the demons behind the names and the idols.
Mormonism is guilty of this very sin. As Bill Schnoebelen so clearly illustrates, in his DVD, "Mormonism's Temple of Doom" , Mormonism worships a Jesus so different from the real Jesus Christ, he might as well be an idol sitting on the shelf in an ancient pagan house. Mormon belief is so diametrically opposed to Christian doctrine that it can be classified as the exact opposite of Biblical Christianity.
In fact, Schnoebelen goes even further. He declares that Mormonism is really the practice of Witchcraft and was "created by witches for witches". That is a powerful statement, but the evidence for such a declaration can be seen on the outside of the Mormon Temple in Salt Lake City, as shown in Schnoebelen's DVD, "Except The Lord Build The House: How Mormon Temples Are Built To Be Demon Magnets", pictured to the right.
In this 2012 Presidential election, Evangelical leaders are stepping forward, smoothly assuring their followers that they can vote for a Mormon. After all, we are electing a Commander-in-Chief, not a Theologian-In-Chief! Then, these leaders tell their people that, at least Mormonism worships "Jesus" and they share the same Family Values as do we!
All lies, as we have written so fervently over the past year to prove, and as we prove in "Mormonism's Temple of Doom"!
At this point, such Evangelical leaders should pay heed. All men face a very high bar on Judgment Day, when they stand before Jesus Christ in eternity. Listen to Jesus' warning.
"But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. " Matthew 12:36, Parallel Bible, KJV/Amplified Bible Commentary)
Let us now examine the commentary from Jameison-Faucett-Brown, a favorite commentary from C.H. Spurgeon.
"They might say, 'It was nothing: we meant no evil; we merely threw out a supposition ... if it will not stand, let it go; why make so much of it, and bear down with such severity for it?' Jesus replies, 'It was not nothing, and at the great day will not be treated as nothing: Words, as the index of the heart, however idle they may seem, will be taken account of, whether good or bad, in estimating character in the day of judgment'."—Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
When Evangelical leaders pay no attention to John's stark warning to have nothing to do with pagan leaders, and then they pay no attention to Jesus' warning about having to account for every word every one of us speaks, how great is their severity when they take the public stage to urge their followers to vote for a Presidential candidate whose religion is so offensive we are not to wish him "Godspeed" or invite him into our home!
Mitt Romney - A Clone of Barack Obama?
But, now, I want to shift gears here to talk about the public positions of Mitt Romney. Once any genuine Christian realizes how Liberal and how vile Mitt Romney's public policies truly are, they will surely never vote for him! Surely, they will not consider Romney to be a "lesser of two evils".
In fact, people who read this record of truth about Mitt Romney may look at his picture the next time and see Barack Obama!
NEWS BRIEF: "RomneyCare Now Funding FREE Abortions: A Disqualifier for Mitt Romney's Candidacy", MassResistance News, March 7, 2012
"RomneyCare now offers free elective surgical abortions ... Mitt Romney was the enabler. This is how his government-dictated health plan is playing out. And he's still proud of it ... When the law was first implemented, there was a $50 copay for a RomneyCare elective surgical abortion. Now RomneyCare abortions are "free" for a $0 copay (or $50-$100 in some plans). In fact, the $0 copay shows up as early as 2008 at the Massachusetts Health Care Connector site. "
Romney's pro-abortion timeline - Look at how Romney filled out the Planned Parenthood Questionnaire
Romney's own record is clearly in support of 'a woman's right to choose' to kill her baby, and pro population control:
1992: Romney voted for "population-control fanatic" Paul Tsongas in the Democrat Presidential primary.
1994: In his U.S. Senate debate with Ted Kennedy, he said: "I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. '
2002: In his campaign for Governor of Massachusetts, Romney told Planned Parenthood he supported Roe v. Wade, state-funded abortions ... I will preserve and protect a woman's right to choose and am devoted and dedicated to honoring my word in that regard..."
Romney "picked a pro-abortion running mate for Lt. Governor."
2002-2006: As Governor, Romney never expressed religious-freedom concerns over the 2002 state law requiring employers to offer health insurance including contraception benefits. "
2004 (November 9): Romney claims he converted to a pro-life outlook following consideration of embryo and cloning research."
2005: October: He contradicted his own veto, signing a bill to get a federal waiver to expand distribution of "emergency contraception" to low-income women (as he had promised Planned Parenthood he would do in 2002) ... Planned Parenthood praised the Governor for this act."
December – Romney forced Catholic Hospitals to dispense 'emergency contraception' (morning-after abortion pill). His pro-abortion Chief Legal Counsel, Mark Nielsen, provided cover for Romney's 24-hour flip-flop (contradicting his own Department of Public Health). "
2006: April 12: Romney signed RomneyCare into law, including Planned Parenthood on the advisory board setting standards for coverage ... Romney was proud of his close association with his 'collaborator and friend', pro-abortion Senator Ted Kennedy, during the 'crafting' of the 'bold' new health care plan..."
Once again, we are brought face-to-face with the stark reality that there is no practical difference between Republican / Democrat or Conservative / Liberal. Leaders of each party are equally committed to the New World Order. Do you remember what the New World Order program is concerning abortion?
"Take control of the world ... to reduce ... the world to a safe level by a process of benevolent slavery and genocide ... The only alternative left to the world's ruling elite was to increase the death rate ... Dr. Aurelio Peccei of the Club of Rome ... advocated that a plague be introduced that would have the same effect as the Black Death of history." (Bill Cooper, "Behold A Pale Horse", p. 49, 167)
To carry out this portion of the plan of population reduction from the Elite, both Romney and Kennedy collaborated on a death-dealing abortion program which should have been strenuously rejected by the supposedly "Family Values" governor, Mitt Romney.
"After his 'conversion' and governorship: Romney still declares abortion to be a state's rights issue, believes abortions are acceptable in the case of rape and incest, and says some human embryo research is fine."
NEWS BRIEF: "Mitt Romney's CPAC Speech: His Claims vs. the Truth", MassResistance News, February 17, 2012
"Mitt Romney's speech at CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference, Feb. 10, 2012) was at best full of half-truths and misrepresentations ... People say that Mitt Romney is a flip-flopper. I think that's very unjust. I think he's been a very consistent politician. He consistently works both sides of the street on the same issue. He is consistently cynical and expedient and self-serving. - C. J. Doyle, President of Catholic Action League of Massachusetts, quoted in LifeSite News."
We invite you to read this very long article indepth, as it is much too long to reprint here. You will discover that Mitt Romney is just as good a liar and an issues "flip-flopper" as President Bill Clinton ever was! Is this the type of man genuine Christians want as President of the United States?
Homosexuality Issues
NEWS BRIEF: "Campaigning in Iowa, Mitt Romney publicly re-states his pro-homosexual positions on military, judges, and more: An unsettling glimpse into a Romney Administration", MassResistance, December 20, 2011
"As the campaigning for the Iowa caucuses on January 3 heats up, Mitt Romney has publicly — and rather shockingly — restated his support for many of the homosexual movement's goals. These recent statements, while fairly shocking, certainly square with his actions as Governor of Massachusetts, which we have documented. They differ sharply from the hardcore "social conservative" facade he presented when he ran for president in 2008. He did his best to disguise his radical viewpoint and record on \'sexual orientation' then."
"These positions certainly make Romney in the minority among the Republican presidential candidates, and would make him the most pro-homosexual Republican presidential nominee ever were he to get the nomination." (Emphasis added)
"(1) Support for gays in the military"
"I'm not planning on reversing that at this stage ... in 1994 while running against Ted Kennedy for US Senate, he said in his infamous letter to the homosexual group Log Cabin Republicans that open service for homosexuals in the military was a goal he agreed with."
"(2) Romney's strong support for 'gay rights' in society"
"Moderator Chris Wallace: 'In 1994, when you were running for the Senate, you wrote a letter to the Log Cabin Republicans in which you said, "I am more convinced than ever before that, as we seek full equality for America's gay and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than my opponent," who was Ted Kennedy. . . So you are still more of a champion of gay rights than Ted Kennedy was?"
Romney: "I believe as a Republican, I had the potential to fight for antidiscrimination in a way that would be even better than Senator Kennedy, as a Democrat, was expected to do so."
Now we know, from Mitt's own lips: He is "more of a champion of gay rights than Ted Kennedy was"!
3) "During Romney's term as Governor, this was particularly manifested in the public schools, where Romney's 'Governor's Commission for Gay and Lesbian Youth' was well-funded, had access in the schools, and put on an annual 'Youth Pride Parade' and 'gay/transgender' prom in Boston. On two occasions (2003 and 2004) Romney signed proclamations for 'Gay Youth Appreciation Day' to coincide with those events."
There is no difference whatsoever between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama on support of gay/lesbian/transgender "rights"! Are you listening, genuine Christian? Can you still justify your vote for Romney as the "lesser of two evils" now that you have been confronted with the truth?
4) Romney does not consider homosexuality to be "immoral".
"... the best key to understanding Romney's moral position on homosexuality may be his condemnation of Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, General Peter Pace. In March 2007, Pace committed the politically incorrect sin of saying that homosexuality is immoral."
What was Mitt Romney's response?
"I think General Pace has said that he regrets having said that, and I think he was wise to have issued an apology, or a withdrawal of that comment. I think that we, as a society, welcome people of all differences, whether there are differences in ethnicity, faith, or sexual preference, and I think he was wise to correct his comment and to suggest that was an inappropriate point to have made."
How could Romney say this when the Holy Bible pointedly condemns homosexuality and warns that anyone practicing it should be put to death in this life and will be tormented in Hell in the next life? Oh, wait a moment: Romney is not Christian, he is Mormon. Mitt does not recognize neither the validity nor the moral authority of the Christian Holy Bible!
Do you see how a person's inner heart values must be considered when he or she is running for political office? God was right after all, when He said that He looks upon a man's heart when selected a king!
5) "(3) Willing to appoint homosexual [activist] judges"
"Romney has strongly indicated that he does not believe that homosexuality is a moral issue and not a concern even when appointing judges."
6) "Touting pro-homosexual/transgender daycare center as 'success story' "
"Twice during the debate Romney mentioned Bright Horizons Children's Centers as one of his businesses successes. Sounds good, until you dig deeper ... To social conservatives, Bright Horizons, a national day-care provider, is a huge red flag. Like Bain Capital, Romney's old company, Bright Horizons has earned a 100% rating with the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), a national homosexual advocacy organization."
This point is HUGE, so stay with me, please.
" What does a 100% HRC rating mean?"
* Company must give full transgender benefits, including hormone treatments,
cosmetic, and even surgical procedures.
* Company must have domestic partner benefits and full "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" equal opportunity policies.
* Company cannot donate any money to, or have any financial relationship with, pro-family groups, or in the case of law firms, give them legal advice.
* And MUCH more."
"Bright Horizons describes its commitment to diversity to include, among other things, celebrating the value of all "sexual orientations, family structures and genders."
Thus, Romney has no trouble bringing acceptance of gay/lesbian/transgender lifestyle into your "family structure". Genuine Christian, do you still want to vote for this man?
(7) Romney on "gay marriage": yes and no."
"During the debate, Romney said emphatically: 'I oppose same-sex marriage. That's been my position from the beginning'. But Romney's definition only extends to the word 'marriage'. He supports state-sanctioned same-sex marriage-like relationships, even involving children."
I remember the dramatic flip-flop of President Bush just a day prior to his 2004 re-election. He stated, on national TV that he supported "Civil Unions", a code word for "gay marriage"!
NEWS BRIEF: "Huckabee: Governor Romney acted unconstitutionally on 'gay marriage' ", MassResistance News, February 5, 2012
"Why is the media — including the supposed 'conservative' media — refusing to bring up what is perhaps Romney's most serious failing as Governor of Massachusetts: his violation of the Massachusetts Constitution in implementing 'gay marriage'? Is it because they want to continue the myth that 'gay marriage' was 'legalized' in Massachusetts? "
"... many highly respected conservative legal and political analysts urged Governor Romney to follow the Massachusetts Constitution and ignore the state high court's illegitimate marriage ruling (issued in November 2003) sanctioning same-sex marriage. That ruling stayed 'entry of judgment' for six months 'to permit the Legislature to take such action as it may deem appropriate in light of [the] opinion'. Even though the Legislature deemed it appropriate to do nothing and refused to comply, Romney proceeded to order his executive departments to implement 'gay marriage' at the end of the six-month period, without any change in the existing one man/one woman marriage law, and without a legal requirement to take such action."
"Former Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-Ark.) says that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-Calif.) and former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-Mass.) should not have complied with decisions by their state supreme courts that ordered legal recognition of same-sex marriage ... Huckabee. "They were both decisions that the governors simply could have said the court has said that we have to do it, but let them enforce it. Because those were administrative decisions that had to put that in place and there was no mandate."
This next action by Governor Romney allows us to see that he was actively supporting the illegal ruling of the Massachusetts Supreme Court.
"Before the May 17, 2004, deadline, however, then-Gov. Romney directed that the words 'bride' and 'groom' on Massachusetts marriage applications be changed to 'Party A' and 'Party B'. Romney's chief legal counsel, Daniel Winslow, told justices of the peace in Massachusetts that they should carry out the decision of the court [even though the court did not require them to do so] and perform same-sex marriages or resign."
Daniel Winslow is an interesting politician. "As a State Rep. candidate in 2010, Winslow was endorsed and thanked by the homosexual-transgender lobby for his support of the 'gay marriage' ruling while acting as Gov. Romney's Chief Legal Counsel. It was Winslow who devised the 'Party A/Party B' designation and who conducted the training sessions for Town Clerks and Justices of the Peace."
Thus, we can see that Mitt Romney is pro-gay, just as Barack Obama is pro-gay.
However, what few people remember is that "Conservative" Republican President, George W. Bush, was so pro-gay that Concerned Women of America called attention to his shocking policies, which at that time were being concealed from Christians. Read full details in NEWS1600, entitled, "WHY ARE GAYS, LESBIANS 'A-GLOW' OVER BUSH POLICIES?" and NEWS1652, entitled, "CONCERNED WOMEN OF AMERICA [CWA] RAISES THE ALARM ON PRESIDENT BUSH: HIS POLICIES ARE IDENTICAL TO CLINTON'S REGARDING THE GAY AND LESBIAN AGENDA!".
Once again, we see that there is absolutely no difference between Republican and Democrat Parties! If an issue is near and dear to the heart of the Global Elite, officials of both parties will support it, even if such support is inconsistent with the type of politician the person was supposed to be.
Romney's Record On Judicial Appointments
NEWS BRIEF: "Romney's Record on Judicial and Legal Appointments: Can he be trusted as President to appoint conservatives to the Courts and Justice Department?", MassResistance News, December 11, 2009
"Mitt Romney's record as Governor does not indicate a commitment to a conservative judicial philosophy. His judge appointees revealed at best "no philosophical or partisan pattern" (Boston Globe), or at worst a liberal and even radical tilt. He sought out feminists and radical homosexual groups in his judicial selection process. How then could we expect him to keep his recent promises to appoint constitutional conservatives to the bench if he is elected President? "
"What sort of attorneys would he name to his Justice Department? As Governor, his Chief Legal Counsels advised him to implement unconstitutional policies: implementing 'gay marriage' without legislative authorization, and forcing Catholic hospitals to dispense morning-after abortion pills. Are achieving 'diversity' and 'non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation' still core values for Romney in his appointments?"
"Conservative Elites" Enabling Romney To Deceive Genuine Conservatives
NEWS BRIEF: "A Stern Warning to the 'Conservative Elites' about Mitt Romney", MassResistance News, January 2, 2008
"Through their silence, the elites are assisting a political cancer that has profound consequences for our children and grandchildren. We must oppose the deception of the American people by powerful and influential conservatives. Many in the conservative grassroots no longer trust the 'conservative' media, lawyers and leaders, whom they see as serving the GOP establishment regardless of the will of the conservative base, regardless of the truth. We are troubled by the unethical and Orwellian cover-up of Mitt Romney's role in catastrophic events in Massachusetts, once the cradle of American liberty. Actions he took as governor were beyond the pale. "
"As Romney twice explained to the homosexual 'Log Cabin' Republicans, it would take a Republican to enact their agenda."
That is a tremendous statement: Only a Republican governor could enact the Log Cabin Republican agenda! That is so true. I remember 1972, when President Nixon betrayed Conservatives by traveling to China and opening that Communist nation to the Western world. Before he left, the President had to abandon American policy of considering Taiwan as the only genuine representative of China. I remember reading an opinion column which stated that only a "Conservative" Republican could have opened China. Conservatives who were stunned into silence when their President went to China would have fought a "Liberal Democrat" to a standstill had he proposed this action.
Therefore, it is axiomatic that only a Conservative can effect a "Liberal" change in America!
Mitt Romney understands this reality, as his bragging to the Log Cabin Republicans demonstrates.
The authors of this article then list several specific points of contention and concern about Mitt Romney:
1) "Phony Pro-Life 'Conversion' "
2) " 'Gay Marriage', Gay Adoption and Pro-Homosexuality Propaganda In Schools"
In both these very important areas, Governor Mitt Romney is proven to be virtually indistinguishable from President Barack Obama. Just as the "two-faced" bust of the Roman god, Janus, Obama can be thought of as on the left and Romney on the right -- the ultimate two-faced politician.
Thus, can you see that, on an issue near and dear to the heart of the Illuminati in its drive to the New World Order, there is not one whit of difference between Republican and Democrat on key issues? Republicans hide their support of Liberal issues from their Conservative base and Democrats hide their support of Conservative issues from their Liberal base.
Mitt Romney is just as supportive of the New World Order as is Barack Obama and as was Skull & Bones George W. and George H.W. Bush, as was Rhodes Scholar Bill Clinton, and so on and so forth. You get the point.
No genuine Christian should ever support a Mormon for President for the Biblical issues we raise at the end of the DVD, "Mormonism's Temple of Doom".
But, now we can see that no real Born Again, Blood-Bought believe can support Mitt Romney as the "lesser of two evils". Vote your conscience and leave the President block open on your ballot. Vote for local and state issues, but leave the President block clear. We want to say to the wicked Global Elite, we want "None of the Above"!
You will stand before Jesus to justify your vote with Him. You really and truly will. You must, therefore, think long and hard about getting so caught up in the anti-Democrat and anti-Obama rhetoric that you will allow yourself to be talked into voting for Mitt Romney as the "lesser of two evils"! In this light, let us examine the commentary of Jameison-Faucett-Brown Commentary on Matthew 12:36. quoted at the beginning of this article:
"They might say, 'It was nothing: we meant no evil; we merely threw out a supposition ... if it will not stand, let it go; why make so much of it, and bear down with such severity for it?' Jesus replies, 'It was not nothing, and at the great day will not be treated as nothing: Words, as the index of the heart, however idle they may seem, will be taken account of, whether good or bad, in estimating character in the day of judgment'."
Will you vainly say to Jesus, "My vote for Mitt Romney in 2012 was nothing. I meant no evil. I merely acted as a supposition; if it will not stand, let it go; why make so much of it and bear down with such severity for it"? You will cringe as Jesus says, "It was not nothing, and at the great day will not be treated as nothing: Words (actions), as the index of the heart, however idle they may seem, will be taken account of, whether good or bad, in estimating character in the day of judgment'."
I am NOT saying that you will lose your salvation if you vote for Mitt Romney; but I am saying that you could easily lose some reward. One thing is for sure: you will stand before Jesus in eternity to justify every word and deed since you were saved. Are you prepared to vote for a man for President who is identical to Barack Obama?
Are you spiritually ready? Is your family? Are you adequately protecting your loved ones? This is the reason for this ministry, to enable you to first understand the peril facing you, and then help you develop strategies to warn and protect your loved ones. Once you have been thoroughly trained, you can also use your knowledge as a means to open the door of discussion with an unsaved person. I have been able to use it many times, and have seen people come to Jesus Christ as a result. These perilous times are also a time when we can reach many souls for Jesus Christ, making an eternal difference.
If you have accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Savior, but have been very lukewarm in your spiritual walk with Him, you need to immediately ask Him for forgiveness and for renewal. He will instantly forgive you, and fill your heart with the joy of the Holy Spirit. Then, you need to begin a daily walk of prayer and personal Bible Study.
If you have never accepted Jesus Christ as Savior, but have come to realize His reality and the approaching End of the Age, and want to accept His FREE Gift of Eternal Life, you can also do so now, in the privacy of your home. Once you accept Him as Savior, you are spiritually Born Again, and are as assured of Heaven as if you were already there. Then, you can rest assured that the Kingdom of Antichrist will not touch you spiritually.
If you would like to become Born Again, turn to our Salvation Page now.
We hope you have been blessed by this ministry, which seeks to educate and warn people, so that they can see the coming New World Order -- Kingdom of Antichrist -- in their daily news.
Finally, we would love to hear from you.
You can contact us by mail or email.
God bless you.
Copyright © 2012 Cutting Edge Ministries. All rights reserved. This password protected article and its contents are protected under the copyright laws of the United States and other countries. This article is provided by subscription only for use by the subscriber and all other rights are expressly reserved by the copyright owner. Copying and pasting this article, in whole or in part, into e-mails or as attachments to e-mails or posting it on the Internet is strictly prohibited and may subject the offender to civil liability and severe criminal penalties (Title 17, United States Code, section 501 and 506).
Copying and distributing
this article in violation of the above notice is also a violation of God's moral
Become a Headline news subscriber HERE.
Subscribe to our free email updates and messages from our editor by entering your email address below :Return to:


text:
Gold-medal winner pulling for U.S. in women's showdown with Canada
Lisa Brown-Miller of Holland knows what it's like to skate for an Olympic gold medal in ice hockey.
She knows what it's like to proudly wear one around her neck, too.
Brown-Miller played forward on the 1998 United States women's team that took first at the 1998 Nagano Games. It is the last time the U.S. claimed gold.
The U.S. goes for gold at 6 p.m. Thursday in Vancouver on MSNBC against rival Canada, the two-time defending Olympic champion. Brown-Miller will watch intently.
"I think it's going to be a great game that we have been expecting," said Brown-Miller, who works at National Heritage Academy's corporate office in Grand Rapids. She is a six-time member of the U.S. National Team, having played in 1990, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1996 and 1997.
"I've been following the U.S. team since the pre-Olympic tour. Some of their games were on NHL Network, and with Facebook, it's been pretty easy to follow them," Brown-Miller said. "It seems they've been gaining a lot of momentum."
Both the Americans and Canadians are undefeated. The U.S. has outscored four opponents by a 40-2 margin, including a 9-1 rout of Sweden in the semifinals that avenged Sweden's upset in the 2006 Games that sent to the gold-medal game.
Canada has been dominant as well, beating Finland 5-0 in the semifinals and outscoring four opponents 46-2.
"They're a very experienced team," Brown-Miller said of the Canadians. She also served as a TV women's hockey analyst for the 2002 Games in Salt Lake City.
"They have really good leadership. They're mentally tough. Against Canada, you've got to be physically on top of your game and mentally on top of your game."
The two teams have been long-time rivals. They're the best in the world and have faced little competition except for each other.
It offers a unique situation, Brown-Miller said.
"There is an edge carried between the two teams," she said. "They love playing each other, but they're not friends. They understand playing each other makes them better. As a competitor, you want to play against the best."
While the game will be played in front of a partisan crowd, Brown-Miller is confident the U.S. team can win.
She likes how the players' abilities and the way new coach Mark Johnson — a member of the 1980 men's hockey team that skated to gold and is known the "Miracle on Ice" upset of the former U.S.S.R. in the semifinals — has brought everyone together.
"What impressed me watching them is they are young and incredibly skilled," Brown-Miller said. "You call tell they have cohesiveness, a chemistry. In 2002 and 2006, you didn't see that."
The Holland Sentinel

subset: commoncrawl


text:
(CNN) -- Syria's nuclear chief told members of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog agency Tuesday that his country has built a military missile facility at a site where traces of uranium have been detected in the past, a source who attended the meeting told CNN.
IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei is asking nations, including Israel, to make relevant information available.
The disclosure by Ibrahim Othman to members of the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency was the first time Syria has described the type of military facility it has at the Dair Alzour site, the source said.
Othman did not give details about when the facility was built or whether it was operational. He revealed the nature of the facility when asked if Syria had a nuclear facility at the site, the source said.
Syria has been repeatedly questioned over whether a nuclear facility exists at the site, which was bombed by Israeli aircraft in September 2007.
Syria says the missiles that destroyed the building at the site were the source of the uranium particles, according to an IAEA report issued last week. Israel has rejected Syria's claims.
The agency said the uranium particles "are of a type not included in Syria's declared inventory of nuclear material" and that "there is a low probability that the uranium was introduced by the use of missiles."
But, "the presence of the uranium particles," site imagery and procurement information "need to be fully understood."
Syria needs to provide more information and documentation about "the use and nature" of a building that was bombed and its procurement activities, the report said. And, Syria "needs to be transparent by providing access to other locations alleged to be related" to the site.
In the report, IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei also urged Israel and other states to make any relevant information available to the agency and agree to the IAEA sharing the information with Syria.
In November, the agency asked Israel to provide information in response to Syria's claims that its munitions could have been the source of the uranium particles.
Israel said in a December 24 letter "it rejects Syrian claims on the matter" and that "Israel could not have been the source of the uranium particles found on the site of the nuclear reactor."
Syrian authorities have reacted angrily to accusations they were building a nuclear reactor. Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moualem suggested that any trace of uranium unearthed at the military site in eastern Syria came from Israeli bombs.
All About U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency • Israel • Syria


text:
The ungenerous might suggest that this is the revenge of ordinary talents on great ones, but the alternative (say, the icon treatment afforded Michelangelo in The Agony and the Ecstasy) promises audiences a good deal more agony than ecstasy. It's probably better for us to be reminded that our cultural giants were human beings with human needs -- that, so to speak, Shakespeare had to put on his tights one leg at a time just like the rest of us.
In director John Madden's cheeky, delightfully playful romantic comedy Shakespeare in Love, the budding Bard of Avon is played by Joseph Fiennes, the trim, wide-eyed fellow who, as the enigmatic Earl of Leicester, can currently be seen deflowering the Virgin Queen in Elizabeth. In Madden's film he's up to more speculative historical fooling around.
As Shakespeare Fiennes sports closely cropped hair and a neat beard. He wears a shiny black doublet, left hanging oh-so-casually open, and he runs around a lot. He's forever charging headlong through the crowded, squalid streets of 1593 London, or over drawbridges or through the Rose Theater. As the story progresses his clothes keep getting dustier. Just as Mozart's wig in Amadeus made him look like one of the Stray Cats, Shakespeare's black jacket here makes him resemble Mad Max.
Most of his running around is done in pursuit of a young gentlewoman named Viola (Gwyneth Paltrow), a lover of the theater and of Shakespeare's works in particular; she often attends the command performances for the aging, contrary Queen Elizabeth (Judi Dench). Viola dreams of being an actress, but is separated from the profession both by class and by the still more inconvenient fact that actresses don't yet exist in England: Boy actors play the female roles. Viola, in an adventurous mood, turns the tables on convention, disguising herself as a boy and sneaking into an audition for Shakespeare's new comedy, whose working title is Romeo and Ethel, the Pirate's Daughter.
Unaware of this charade, Shakespeare woos and beds the glorious Viola on her own turf, even though she's soon to be married off to a titled but cash-poor skunk (Colin Firth) who plans to drag her away to the Virginia colony, where he suspects there may be a future in this tobacco thing. Shakespeare is no more available than Viola for the long term; he's already married and a father, though his family back in Stratford doesn't seem to slow him down much on his rounds of London wenchery.
Nonetheless, he and Viola waste no time falling into passionate, bittersweet love, which shapes Romeo and Ethel into Romeo and Juliet. As the author becomes increasingly aware of the impermanence of his affair with Viola, his play curves away from comedy toward tragedy.
Historically this is all nonsense, of course. Shakespeare no more invented the plot of Romeo and Juliet than did Arthur Laurents when he wrote West Side Story; he filched the yarn wholesale from The Tragical History of Romeus and Juliet, a long, dreary 1562 poem by Arthur Brooke (and Brooke's ghost should be grateful for the theft). Indeed, Shakespeare had already borrowed the setting and other elements from Brooke's work for one of his earliest plays, The Two Gentlemen of Verona.
But if Shakespeare in Love is baloney, it's not stupid baloney; it's actually pretty learned baloney. The plot has some elements in common with Cothburn Madison O'Neal's The Dark Lady, a 1964 American novel in which Shakespeare is the front for the plays written by a woman disguised as a boy actor in his troupe. But Shakespeare in Love is less ambitious; the idea here is simply to create an incident in the young man's life that moved him toward maturity, both as man and artist.
The story (by Marc Norman and Tom Stoppard, no less) is studded with allusions to or paraphrases of famous Shakespearean quotes, as if we're seeing their genesis. Woven into the story are themes that will become recurrent in his plays: beguiling heroines who disguise themselves as boys, ardent lovers climbing up balconies, women trapped in unhappy betrothals. Viola, whose name has just the significance you'd expect, has a bustling, faithful nurse (Imelda Staunton) who is plainly the prototype for Juliet's, and there's even a fickle wench named Rosaline (Sandra Reinton), for whom Shakespeare forgets his infatuation when he meets his true love.
Along with this agreeable romantic conceit, Shakespeare in Love presents a pageant of colorful figures from the Elizabethan theater world: the producer Philip Henslowe (Geoffrey Rush); the corrupt, officious Master of the Revels Edmund Tilney (Simon Callow); Shakespeare's ill-fated fellow genius Christopher Marlowe (Rupert Everett); and famous actors of the time such as Richard Burbage (Martin Clunes) and Ned Alleyn. In the latter role Ben Affleck shows a comic buoyancy he hasn't before demonstrated. A mouse-breeding guttersnipe named John Webster (Joe Roberts) says he approves of the gory bits in Shakespeare's plays; he'll grow up to write great Jacobean shockers like The Duchess of Malfi.
This theatrical backdrop is the best element of the film. It probably could be said to save the picture, actually; without all the color and texture that the Rose Theater and its habitues provide, Shakespeare in Love would be little more than The Bridges of Madison County in Renaissance drag. As a love story it's conventional, but as a lighthearted show-biz story it's a blast.
Norman and Stoppard even allow themselves some fairly broad gags, placing cliches of the modern theater in an Elizabethan context. Ferrymen on the Thames behave like New York City cabbies, and a waiter at a tavern describes that day's special to his table (no doubt he's really an actor). The money man (Tom Wilkinson) backing Henslowe's production of Romeo and Juliet gets caught up in the spirit of things, and when he's given a walk-on as the Apothecary he assumes the role with the utmost seriousness. Rehearsing the big fight scene, the guy playing Tybalt gives a labored reading to a line, and Alleyn, who's playing Mercutio, makes a face and says, "Are you going to say it that way?" It's funny because we rarely think of Renaissance actors having to rehearse at all.
The cast of Shakespeare in Love seems well rehearsed. Paltrow does heartfelt work in her third turn as a Brit, following Emma and Sliding Doors. She's uncommonly good at acting heartbroken, the Renaissance clothes look astounding on her, and she's not bad in the passages of Romeo and Juliet she gets to do.
My favorite performance in Shakespeare in Love, however, belongs to Rush. His shaggy-haired, yellow-toothed Henslowe, who philosophically accepts the constant disasters of theater life, is absurdly endearing, like an Elizabethan Fozzie Bear.
It's not surprising Fiennes's performance is the most problematic. Can we really believe that the soaring yet lucid poetry, the stirring, overflowing emotion of Othello or King Lear or The Tempest could have come out of this boy-ingenue? Of course not. Yet I doubt it would seem any more convincing no matter how he was portrayed, or even if we could somehow meet the real Shakespeare: the shrewd, prosperous, social-climbing, politically conservative man who comes across from what spare historical record exists. Those just-named plays seem too protean in viewpoint and too universally accessible to be the work of that guy, or of any one person, which is no doubt why, along with class and academic elitism, so many have tried, so unpersuasively, to attribute them to somebody higher on the social or educational ladder.
Much to its credit, Shakespeare in Love doesn't take itself seriously. But if there's nothing very imaginative about the film's portrait of Shakespeare, there's nothing terribly implausible about it, either. These filmmakers have taken a historical figure and made him into a hot-blooded romantic hero. Shakespeare did that a time or two himself.
Shakespeare in Love.
Directed by John Madden.
Written by Marc Norman and Tom Stoppard. Starring Joseph Fiennes, Gwyneth Paltrow, Geoffrey Rush, Simon Callow, Rupert Everett, Ben Affleck, Judi Dench, and Joe Roberts.


text:
Congress could (possibly) accomplish big things in 2014
The following is the opinion of the USA Today editorial board:
Some historians quibble that last year's session of Congress can't be called the least productive ever because some in the 19th century did even less. Regardless, the 2013 Congress was a stinker.
House and Senate extremists pointlessly shut down much of the government. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada was exaggerating only a little when he said Congress was now "less popular than a cockroach."
As this year's session gets underway, the prospects for anything better seem bleak. Hopes for a grand bargain that would produce ambitious reforms of taxes and entitlements seem dashed. So much so that minimalist agreements such as the modest budget deal Republicans and Democrats reached last month draw applause. Getting excited about that is a little like praising a 4-year-old for managing to get his socks on by himself.
Not that President Barack Obama did any better. Until late in the year, his low point was a stunning gaffe on Syria, when he decided to ask Congress for permission to use military force after the Syrian regime crossed his "red line" on chemical weapons. Obama was rescued from a humiliating rejection by a deal cooked up by his nemesis, Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Then came the rollout of the Obamacare website, exposing a level of incompetence that eclipsed all other news. It has gotten better, but other aspects of the program are still so riddled with problems that it makes you wonder whether a president who let his signature achievement wander so far off track can fix it.
He won't get any help. Republicans, gleeful at Obamacare's troubles, remain unwilling to offer an alternative or contribute to a solution. Instead, another shot at the law is among the first votes in the House again this year.
Such theatrics are to be expected in an election year, when politicians usually spend their energy not on getting things done but on trying to make the other guys look bad. The phrase being used to describe this year is "small ball," modest initiatives that might be useful as talking points for the November elections. The Democrats' version is to focus on income inequality, featuring a poll-tested push to increase the minimum wage.
But there is one sliver of hope for something more. In 1996, another election year, things looked about as bleak. Then as now, Republicans were trying to recover from an unpopular government shutdown, and things began to change.
President Bill Clinton was running for re-election, too, and all sides needed something to show voters. Compromise and a certain amount of desperation helped produce four significant bills: welfare reform; a measure that allowed people to take health insurance from job to job; a telecommunications bill that created today's competition between telephone and cable companies; and a minimum wage hike.
This year's agenda is rife with equivalent opportunities.
Let's pick just three: Immigration reform, a long-due overhaul of the beleaguered Postal Service and at least a credible start on rewriting the nation's absurdly complex tax code. Bipartisan adjustments to Obamacare would be even better, though perhaps too fanciful.
First comes a test of whether the shutdown even taught Congress to tend to the basics: funding government and avoiding another foolish confrontation over the debt ceiling.
Don't bet on it. But in an election year, it's not unreasonable to hope for a surprise.
THE ISSUE: Worries that the underperforming 2013 Congress will be worse this year.
ANOTHER VIEW: Big legislation in Clinton's second term in 1997-2001 bode well. Some ideas to consider.


text:
Israel Today
Thursday, June 16, 2011 | Aviel Schneider
In the shadow of the conflict over the Promised Land more and more Palestinians are disclosing the truth: Entire families are considering conversion to Judaism. They claim that their ancestors were forced to choose between religion (Judaism) and remaining on the Land, and hence, they were compelled to convert to Islam.
On our forays into the biblical heartland of Judea and Samaria we have met many Palestinians who have told us about their Jewish ancestry. For their own protection, we cannot publish everything that we were told.
These Palestinians are part of the seed of Israel and could be called "Palestinian Marranos" – like the "secret Jews" of Spain in the 15th century who were forced to convert to Christianity, but covertly remained observant Jews. By returning to the Jewish religion and nation, they foresee a peaceful resolution of the conflict.
"My great great-grandparents immigrated to Israel from Yemen about 300 years ago," Mohammed Sir told Israel Today. "My grandfather and my father told me that we are actually Jews. As Jews they would have been forced to pay protection money in order to live here under Islamic rule."


text:
Hatton, Sir Christopher
Hatton, Sir Christopher, 1540–91, English courtier. He became a favorite of Queen Elizabeth I, from whom he received offices, honors, and lands. Knighted in 1578, he acted as Elizabeth's spokesman in the House of Commons and, although not a lawyer, was lord chancellor from 1587 until his death. He was a friend and patron of Edmund Spenser. Hatton himself wrote the fourth act of Tancred and Gismund (first pub. 1591), a tragedy by Robert Wilmot, Henry Noel, Hatton, and others. Ely Place in Holborn, formerly in the possession of the bishops of Ely, was granted to him, and the name of the garden there was changed to Hatton Garden.
See A. G. Vines, Neither Fire Nor Steel: Sir Christopher Hatton (1978).
The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2023, Columbia University Press. All rights reserved.
See more Encyclopedia articles on: British and Irish History: Biographies


text:
Extract of a Letter from Lieut. John Pelham to his Father, in this County, dated,
July 23, '61
I just write to let you know that we have had one of the most desperate battles ever fought on American soil. It was the most desperate — the enemy fought long and well, but victory is ours, it was a splendid victory too. Jeff Davis made his appearance on the field, just as the last of the Yankees were in full retreat. I was under a heavy fire of musketry and cannon for about seven hours, how I escaped or why I was spared a just God only knows. Rifle balls fell like hail around me. Shells bursted and scattered their fragments through my Battery — my horse was shot under me, but did not give out till the fight was almost over. I was compelled to take one of my Sergeant's horses and ride through. At one time I dismounted and directed the guns — one of the gunners asked me to dismount and shoot the Federals flag down. I did so — you ought to have heard the cheers they gave me. I directed all my guns three or four times apiece. My men were cool and brave and made terrible havoc on the enemy. They fought better than I expected they would. The highest praise is due them. We shot down three U.S. flags and dislodged the enemy from several positions. I was complimented several times on the field of battle by general officers and a great many times after the battle was over by other officers, you may want to know my feelings — I felt as cool and deliberate under the shower of lead and iron as if I had been at home by our fireside — I did not feel fear at any moment; I can't see how I escaped, — a merciful Providence must have been watching over us and our cause. We slept on our arms last night but were not disturbed. The battle began about 8 o'clock but did not become general until 10 o'clock. We fought desperately about 9 1/2 hours, but I was under fire only about 7 1/2 hours, the enemy attacked our left flank and then tried to turn it. We had to change our line of battle and fight them on their own ground.
We whipped old Scott on Sunday — his great fighting fortunate day on ground of their own choosing in open field. They poured down overwhelming numbers on us. I firmly believe they had three to our one — but I don't know positively how many they had — certainly between 50,000 and 100,000 men. A great many prisoners told us, they expected confidently to whip us here and then go to Richmond. We have got about 1000 prisoners and the cavalry are bringing them in continually. We took the celebrated Rhode Island battery of rifled cannon, also Sherman's great battery of the same kind of guns — also the West Point battery that I have drilled with so often.
They say we have taken 90 pieces of Artillery — I have not seen all of them, but I have seen a great many. They had the best Artillery trains and equippage I ever beheld, but We have them now, I have no idea how many small arms we took, a great many. The victory was splendid and complete. Col. Forney's Reg't was not engaged — but the 4th Ala. Regt. was cut all to pieces. They fought desperately. The Col., the Lieut. Col. and Major were all shot down but neither of them are mortally wounded. I don't know what the intention of our General is but I hope I will be able to write to you from Washington City before many weeks. Johnston's forces were encamped at Winchester, but we all moved down here on getting a dispatch from Beauregard. We got here the evening before the fight — Beauregard repulsed them with considerable loss a few days ago.
I have seen what Romancers call glorious war. I have seen it in all its phases. I have heard the booming of cannon, and the more deadly rattle of musketry at a distance — I have heard it all near by and have been under its destructive showers. I have seen men and horses fall thick and fast around me. I have seen our own men bloody and frightened flying before the enemy — I have seen them bravely charge the enemy's lines and heard the shout of triumph as they carried the position, I have heard the agonizing shrieks of the wounded and dying — I have passed over the battle field and seen the mangled forms of men and horses in frightful abundance — men without heads, without arms, and others without legs. All this I have witnessed and more, till my heart sickens; and war is not glorious as novelists would have us believe. It is only when we are in the heat and flush of battle that it is fascinating and interesting. It is only then that we enjoy it. When we forget ourselves and revel in the destruction we are dealing around us. I am now ashamed of the feelings I had in those hours of danger. The whistling of bullets and shells was music to me, I gloried in it — it delighted and fascinated me — I feared not death in any form; but when the battle was won and I visited the field a change came over me, I see the horrors of war, but it is necessary. We are battling for our rights and our homes. Ours is a just war, a holy cause. The invader must meet the fate he deserves and we must meet him as becomes us, as becomes men. As President Davis said, several months ago, "a small mound of earth marks the place where the invader fell."
Jacksonville (Alabama) Republican, 8-8-1861


text:
See the positive impact of choosing this product
Compared to conventional practices.
Customer Reviews
Wonderful organiser for mobiles
Its a good usable product
They kept their promises, means items are of same quality as it shown in picture
You may also like
We aim to ensure that you receive your order as quickly as possible.
Our average delivery time is approximately 7-10 business days,
once we ship the products from the warehouse. *Delivery times may vary a bit depending on customer location, any public holidays, and unforeseen
Please note that our standard delivery times are estimates and may vary due to external factors.
Packages are not shipped nor delivered on weekends and local public holidays.
It depends on where you are. Orders processed here will take 5-7 business days to arrive. Overseas deliveries can take anywhere from 7-16 days. Delivery details will be provided in your confirmation email.
We use all major carriers, and local courier partners. You'll be asked to select a delivery method during checkout.
We always aim for make sure our customers love our products, but if you do need to return an order, we're happy to help. Just email us directly and we'll take you through the process.
It depends on the creator and the product. All options are outlined on the product page, so look out for customization options there.
If we still haven't answered your question, you can contact
us below and we will get back to you as soon as possible. We will be
happy to assist you.
Any question?
If we still haven't answered your question, you can contact us below and we will get back to you as soon as possible.


text:
Burzynski Patient Amelia S.'s Story
The case of Amelia S. is a hard one to write about, because it tipped skeptics off to a pattern in the stories that patients at the clinic were telling, that their worsening symptoms were signs of improvement. As you will see, this is a story that Burzynski's patients have been relating for decades. It's a long post, but it's important that you read to the bottom.
3-year old Amelia S. lived in Reading. In about September of 2011, Amelia started displaying neurological symptoms–wobbliness and a trembling left hand (often drawn into a fist). The family brought her in to the hospital after she started falling down. On Jan 30th, 2012, she was diagnosed with a brain tumor, and on the 1st of Feb it was determined to be a large tumor on the brainstem. Surgery revealed a grade 2 diffuse astrocytoma, which the family was given to understand meant that the core of the tumor was likely grade 3. Doctors were unable to remove much of the tumor, only the 4 biopsy samples.
Amelia's medical team was honest. The benefit offered by radiation and chemotherapy, on average, could be measured in weeks. These are bad, bad tumors. The family brought Amelia home on the 20th of February, her mobility and speech impaired, opting to spare Amelia the unpleasantness of the chemotherapy and radiotherapy. When they saw Amelia improving (we're not told what those improvements were–whether they were reduction in tumor size or reduced swelling as she recovered from surgery, for instance), however, family understandably felt obliged to look for other options.
They found Burzynski. Immediately, the enormous price tag of his antineoplaston treatments spurred the family on to raise funds. Amelia's father began documenting their journey to Burzynski in a couple of places, at ameliasmiracle.com and on a Facebook page of the same name. As a whole, his story is the most moving and insightful account of parental heroism that I have read since I began this project, and I strongly recommend that you read it for yourself.
By the end of February 2012, the family had decided on Burzynski. We were introduced to Amelia on February 28th in a video posted by her father:
Attached to the video was a simple plea:
Our daughter, Amelia, was diagnosed at the beginning of February with a very rare type of inoperable brain tumour. She has only a few months to live. We have a ray of hope – treatment for her is available at the Burzynski clinic in Houston, Texas. This treatment in total will cost around £200,000. We need to raise this money to allow Amelia to have the chance to live a normal life.
From the beginning, the family sought media attention to raise money for the Burzynski Clinic, as we see in a Facebook post. the earliest example of Amelia's story appearing in the press was in the local Wokingham Times on 8 March 2012. The public campaign was launched. And by 14 March, £45,000 had been raised by the community, enough to get Amelia in the door at the Clinic (recent accounts put that initial consult at $30,000). The Wokingham Times seems to have informally adopted the family and followed their progress closely for the rest of the year. These community fundraisers appear as human interest stories and reaffirm that people are basically kind and generous and trusting. In fact, my first exposure to Burzynski and realization that something was profoundly wrong came after I did a newspaper database search for all of the patients that I could find. Of those patients I could find an outcome for, every patient who appeared in the international press, usually begging for money, with a single exception was dead.
A week before Amelia hit the papers, on the 6th of March, Eric Merola, who made an uncritical hagiography to Burzynski unironically called, Burzynski: Cancer is a Serious Business, interviewed the family about their upcoming trip to Houston for his new movie, a sequel, which comes out soon. He planned to follow Amelia's progress in the film. On the 17th, as they planned their trip to the US, the family put up a short video for Amelia's donors:
So, she clearly she packed everyone's hearts into her suitcase. Such a dear.
They left on the 23th of March for America, having raised a staggering £75,000 for Burzynski. In a Wokingham Times piece, her father stated some of the opposition that the family had met:
Mr Saunders added that he was amazed at the number of people who had suggested the American treatment would be fruitless.
He said: "I was warned about this before we decided to go with the Burzynski treatment – it is like there is a vendetta out against the man.
"It is so strange, and all I keep getting are contacts from patients who have been or are being cured by the treatment, or at the very least have had positive results."
People for whom Burzynski's treatments fail tend not get into contact with other patients. We are witnessing what is known as survivorship bias. You can talk to a dozen survivors and have a positive impression of a treatment but fail to take into account the 10,000 failures, which would put a treatment well below the efficacy of chance remission, misdiagnosis, and unrecognized responses to traditional therapies. This is why controlled trials are so important to determine efficacy, so we can sort out the background noise of chance from real effects. It is also an important reason that dependence on patient testimonials is a red flag for quackery.
Amelia has had a hole opened in her chest where a Hickman line has been inserted, where she will receive her ANP. These frequently have complications with infection and clogging.
By the 30th, Amelia has her backpack full of antineoplastons, as we see in a video. Her family will spend the customary 3 weeks or so in the US learning to administer the ANP themselves. They are infused at high doses almost continuously.
Amelia's dad shares his first impression of the Clinic on the facebook page:
The clinic have been fantastic. I am still amazed that people give them such a bad press. They have literally bent over backwards to get this started for us. The receptionist Irena even has a photo of Amelia behind her desk, she is so lovely!
Well there is a reason, of course. It's because they apparently tell patients that they can tell brain tumors are shrinking by looking at their urine:
Mr Saunders said: "Every day is a milestone and the clinic is being extremely thorough in its tests – Amelia has regular blood tests and these are all closely monitored to check for signs of all sorts of things.
"Interestingly, they can actually see the early signs of the tumour breaking down by how her body excretes it in her blood and urine. This might be the only time in my life I get excited by seeing this kind of information!
I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean, and before Amelia's story I would not have even noticed this. I can see why a parent clinging to hope would sieze onto any augury of healing. Remember, this family has not had good news about Amelia since her diagnosis. Little steps, literally, mean the world to them. I contacted research oncologist David Gorski, who studies and treats breast cancer, about this claim, and he replied:
"Oncologists don't monitor anything in the urine for tumor breakdown, at least not for that tumor. There is such a thing called tumor lysis syndrome, but that's usually only seen in leukemias and lymphomas as a result of induction chemotherapy that kills a lot of cancer cells really fast, releasing potassium, and a number of other byproducts. However, as I said, you don't generally see this in solid tumors (mainly because none of them respond nearly as dramatically to chemotherapy as hematological malignancies). It's also a complication to be managed, because its most frequent result is renal failure. It's possible that he's referring to GFAP, which is a biomarker for glioma under study, but I don't think it's really been validated as a measurement of response to therapy."
There are apparently no biomarkers for glioma that appear in urine. Amelia had chronically low potassium at this point in her treatment.
We don't see a lot of what is going on at the clinic on facebook, where most of the story is told record, but we get a clue on Amelia's other website:
10th April 2012
I realised I hadn't updated the news section here for a few weeks, this is largely because we update our Facebook page daily and much of our time has been taken up going to and from the clinic. Every day has been a bit of a rollercoaster here. Amelia has been on antineoplaston treatment for a week and a half and at the end of last week we hit a bit of a wall with the treatment dosage. Amelia got pretty sick so we had to back down on the dose a little. Yesterday she started getting really bad headaches so we have now also put her on a low dose steroid as well. Other than this, she is doing well and responding well to treatment. We think there are some very slight improvements in her coordination of her left hand side. We are continuing the treatment, and the aim is now to increase the dosage more slowly to see how she responds. All in all we are doing well and looking forward to coming home soon!
So, she's been up and down. The steroids are a recurring feature of treatment and can very quickly reduce inflammation in a way that leads to improvements of the type that the family is reporting. You see it a lot on this website. It's hard not to think of John D., who experienced worsening symptoms while under treatment (and on steroids), which was met with joy on the part of the staff:
I want to mention that the IV nurse told mom today that she's been there for 10 years & has seen this before & many times, the more severe symptoms that are seen as a result of the therapy is really a good sign that it's working better. I know this nurse & she is very honest & helpful. She also runs the class they run every week for new patients.
On April 19th we hear that the family is preparing to return home, and on the Wokingham Times page where it is announced, we see that damned picture again, patients literally at death's door, posing in front of the Burzynski Clinic. We get the update that they have arrived back in England on the 22nd. Amelia's dad talks about the fundraising (truly amazing acts of generosity by the whole community) and how grateful he is for the immense support that the family has received. (Amelia gives her own thank you's in an adorable little video a few days later.) He speculates on the road ahead:
I have come home from Houston with a strange kind of feeling. Perhaps a little apprehension, a bit of fear, a dose of happiness and a shot of hope. We still feel that every day is a roller coaster. We may be sitting on a ticking time bomb, and it may still be that any day we might lose Amelia. Every day truly is so precious, and it is a joy to watch her and her little sister back together again, albeit in a different way, a more careful one, where we have to watch them all the time.
The next day, it sounds like Amelia is having the unquenchable thirst that comes with ANP:
Amelia has been OK today, she was a bit sick earlier but we think this was because she drank too much too quickly – she was fine shortly afterwards. We've been getting used to life again at home and putting everything in place we need to.
And we hear that she is due for her first post-treatment MRI:
As far as the MRI goes, I just want to make a point that we aren't expecting a lot to have happened with this next scan. As part of the medical trial we are required to get a scan done every 4 – 5 weeks – and these things take time to show any change. It is very likely the tumour may be the same or have grown slightly. This is fine and we expect this, and clearly if it has shrunk then great – but we aren't expecting it to have done.
Tumors on which chemotherapy is working should probably not be growing at all. It's the definition of "working."
Today has been a busy day. Unfortunately Amelia was pretty sick this morning – those of you who have been following our journey will know that we are trying to increase Amelia's dose of drugs and it sometimes has side effects, this seeming to be the most common. She was fine afterwards and has been eating for the rest of the day.
We had an appointment at the hospital at lunchtime and ended up spending most of the afternoon there so we could get everything sorted. The doctors here are being very cooperative – but I must emphasise that they are recommending different treatment (chemo) and we have consistently turned this down. We have not found a single person with a DIPG tumour that has had any effect with chemo – so continue to find it strange that this is offered. Our plan is to continue the antineoplaston treatment for as long as required. We realise this is being frowned upon by the doctors here – but ultimately we are trying the only thing we found that had credible results.
Credible results would have been publication and replication of his trials. Burzynski can't seem to complete his trials, much less publish them (which is odd given that he has the test agent already developed and the tumors he is working have outcomes comparatively rapidly). If trial completion were a batting average, he'd be at .015 and his trial publication average would be .000.
By May 4, Amelia is a celebrity. They have raised £160,000 (!) and she is meeting and hanging out with celebrities. And the paper has clearly been reading Amelia's dad's updates. Also, her dad's website announces:
Well we have now been back from Houston for a few weeks – and Amelia has continued to slowly improve with both her walking and speech getting better. The Burzynski clinic were brilliant – we were made to feel so welcome and Amelia really made an impression on everybody there!
We had an MRI scan on Monday that revealed her tumour has stopped growing. Considering she has had no treatment other than the antineoplaston therapy from the Burzynski clinic, we are really pleased (and impressed) that the treatment seems to be working so quickly. We are now continuing the treatment and increasing her dose such that we try to get her to the 'target' dose for her weight.
This tumor "stopped growing" news is taken as validation that the treatment is working, so much so, that the Wokingham Times irresponsibly reports that result. According to her dad:
1. Amelia has been on treatment for less than 4 weeks.
2. She is not on full dose yet, and has some way to go to get there. This is a slow progress, perhaps taking another month or so to achieve this (or more).
3. She has a low grade tumour. Any response will be slow. In other kids where the treatment has worked it has taken many months to show response.
4. She is still on steroids.
5. Her previous scan showed a 13% growth in 7 weeks.
So, having now had several opinions of the scans, I can confirm that Amelia's tumour has STOPPED GROWING. This is amazing news and we are over the moon that this is the case. For this tumour type, in this short time, with a tumour of the size of Amelia's, this is an incredibly good result. This is an INCREDIBLY hard tumour to do anything with, one of the hardest to treat and normally very lethal. In most circumstances Amelia would no longer be here (in February there was no way we thought we'd get to May with her) so to have the thing stable is fantastic news.
A few important points. It's a low grade (slow growing) tumor. This does not seem to have been a PET scan, which would give a sense how of active the tumor was–to see if it had in fact "stopped." And initial responses to chemotherapy (and ANP is chemotherapy by every definition) correlate poorly to outcomes, which is, of course, the final goal that everyone involved is keenly interested in. Of course, the Clinic doesn't convey that information:
I also had a good chat with our doctor in Houston earlier. Again all sounding very positive, and we have again increased Amelia's dose tonight […] The clinic sound very positive that Amelia's tumour stopped growing so quickly. Let's just hope we have more positive news on the next scan in June.
On 12 May, we get an update about Amelia's progress:
Amelia was on top form today, she was pretty tired after the wedding but perked up and during doses, when we unplugged her from her backpack, she was really bubbly. Later in the afternoon she was doing some proper walking – unassisted. I think we have now realised that a lot of the walking problem now is just her confidence. She was walking almost normally, and certainly the same or better than she was before her operation. Fantastic.
So, they are at point zero, which considering where they have been is wonderful from the family's perspective, but it doesn't tell us that the ANP is working of if she has just recovered from surgery to her brain stem and is now on steroids. And this may be important, as dad mentions on the 20th:
She really has improved. We've both noticed significant improvements in her speech, mainly in the quality of her pronunciations and also the speed and which she speaks. Slow speech is a classic symptom of her tumour location, so any improvement is a good sign here. This might be the steroids causing this improvement so we have to be careful, but we have a lot of fingers crossed we'll be taking her off the steroids within the next few weeks if we can get her second bag to target dose. We'll see.
Amelia has been a bit groggy, fairly lethargic and pretty reluctant to do a lot. […] Because of the lethargy, the doctor in the US has recommended increasing her steroid dose very slightly. We'll see if this improves things – if it does then this is a good sign. It does all tie in with us increasing her dose, which is now at maximum on her larger bag. No wonder.
Also on the 21rd, just over a year ago, the fundraiser reaches its goal of £200,000, and the tally continues to climb. In the intervening time, however, we hear that Amelia has had some complications with the Hickman line, which has been replaced because of a tear:
She is doing well otherwise, and we'll be resuming her treatment tonight. She is now walking by herself, her coordination and balance have all improved and her speech is much better. It looks like the treatment is definitely helping her.
In early June, dad is rattled by the deaths of patients Billie B. and Supatra A., who had the same tumor as Amelia, and for a few days he rails against skeptics. Apparently some have been contacting him and criticizing him. This is wrong, in my opinion. Cancer patients have enough on their plate.
On the 21st, we hear that the tumor remains stable:
Firstly we are waiting on a further interpretation from Dr Burzynski, but as we suspected from our own view of the scans this morning, Amelia's tumour remains stable. In other words, there is no change since the last scan.
The family accepts this as a sign that they have stayed the brain tumor:
We are 100% sure that without antineoplastons, Amelia would either be in a hospice by now or dead. She has a grade 2 tumour, on scans it appears as a grade 3, and it is very large and in a very dangerous part of the brain. Even a few mm of growth would cause a significant impact on her quality of life at this size. We are all walking on a knife edge. Dr Burzynski's treatment is undoubtedly keeping her alive. I actually want to wave this in the face of all the skeptics we came across along our journey.
It's worth noting that the tumor hasn't shrunk. Small victories–including just not dying–are huge when your child has one of these tumors.
Amelia has her 4th birthday on the 22nd of June, and it is celebrated in the papers.
Again, we see that the steroid dose is being increased on June 25th to control the symptoms of the disease:
We have been advised by the clinic to increase her steroid intake back to how it was last week to see if we see an improvement in her. We will then try in a couple of weeks time to reduce it again but at a slower rate, reducing it by 0.25mg instead of 0.5mg per day. The steroid intake is a tricky issue as they are essential and help reduce the symptoms of this awful disease (headaches, tiredness), however long term steroid use is not good and cause side effects such as weight gain, muscle problems.
We still haven't seen anything that looks like clear evidence of improvement past diagnosis; it sounds like the symptoms return when the steroids are tapered. She seems to be doing pretty well on this dose of steroids, going to school. (Her last day of nursery school is 11 July.)
Well – we have had a pretty good weekend. I had a truly amazing conversation last night. Purely by chance I've been contacted by the mother of another little girl, who is almost the same age as Amelia, who is receiving the same treatment (for longer), with the same tumour (DIPG) and her tumour just shrunk. By 36%. We are so, so pleased. There is so much hope in our hearts now.
I'll just briefly mention how frustrated we still are to read so much crap on the internet about Dr Burzynski. I feel like we are 'insiders', in a way, and know how the whole thing works now. These doubters clearly don't. The lady I spoke to last night was told her daughter would die. When she went to Burzynski, her doctor shut her off. Refused to speak. Thank God she chose to follow her heart, and not that doctors advice. She might just have saved her daughters life. There is no doubt this works, and we want it in every hospital in the world. We'll keep spreading the word until it is.
This child, sadly, is now dead.
By August the tumor has not shrunk, but Amelia has been coping very well. A few weeks earlier she had a wonderful day at the zoo. She's still a little wobbly on her feet and in the pictures her family put on the Facebook page, you can tell that her face is not symmetrical, but by God she's enjoying her life, which is an immense thing in itself. On the 6th however, she gets pale and sick; when her blood work is done, they find that her potassium and magnesium are way down, though they stabilize her.
On August 8, we hear:
One of the many things I have said throughout this year is that I hope that maybe, one day, I can learn that another child has had success with this treatment because of the inspiration they gained from Amelia. I know of one little girl, Chey, who is waiting to go to the clinic right now. But due to some complications with the FDA and the clinic, there are some delays – but we are all hoping she will get there very soon. We felt so welcomed by the Burzynski clinic and everything we saw there made us puzzled why so many people don't believe in it.
We just found out exactly what happened. According to an SEC filing:
In a letter dated June 25, 2012, the [Burzynski] informed the FDA of a serious adverse event which may have been related to the administration of Antineoplastons. On July 30, 2012, the FDA placed a partial clinical hold for enrollment of new pediatric patients under single patient protocols or in any of the active Phase II or Phase III studies under IND 43,742. The FDA imposed this partial clinical hold because, according to the FDA, insufficient information had been submitted by the Company to allow the FDA to determine whether the potential patient benefit justifies the potential risks of treatment use, and that the potential risks are not unreasonable in the context of the disease or condition to be treated.
According to the mother of patient Alynn H., her understanding was that a child had died (link is password protected). We have not heard anything else, only that the ANP trials, almost a year later, have not started up again and that the partial hold remains.
On August 13, Amelia's dad posts a video about Amelia's life since diagnosis. This write up an unusually long post for this blog, and I haven't done justice to the support the family has received from their community or the sheer number of people who pitched in to help the family, and this video gives a sense of that:
On the fifteenth, we hear that the family is understandably anxious for the tumor to shrink:
Incidentally, we are well aware that a stable tumour is good. Mondays scan was one that we went into thinking 'if it is stable then great'. I've had a few people come up to me and ask "is the tumour shrinking?". Now I know people mean well – but it is a little like me walking up to somebody and saying "have you won the lottery yet?". In other words, frustrating. I smile, say no, it will take time, and move the conversation on.
So far, the tumor's behavior has been utterly unrelated to the dose of the antineoplaston chemotherapy. On Aug 25, we hear that Amelia is tired on treatment and that she has had a progression of symptoms:
We are still looking to increase her dose slightly as she has gained a little weight since Houston so she should be able to tolerate an increased dose (or at least we hope so). We will probably have to increase her steroids in line with this, but we have been considering this anyway as she seems to have become a lot more wobbly lately. We know from the MRI that the tumour hasn't grown so an increase in her steroids should help this.
Now, I'm not sure how this was verified. The definition of a "stable" tumor can actually accommodate some growth, so, we can't know exactly what is happening. And we hear from the family a few days later that they have come to a hard realization:
On the 27th, we hear:
Firstly, Amelia hasn't quite been herself unfortunately. She has been very reluctant to walk, a lot more tired, slow and pretty lethargic. She was sick on Saturday night also. We are reasonably confident we have probably gone too far with the steroid reduction so we have actually increased these slightly again today. We decided we would rather have a happy and more alert Amelia than one who doesn't want to do too much – so we made this decision today in coordination with the Burzynski clinic. We'll see how she does. There is a small chance it is the tumour growing, but much more likely given the scans we have that this is due to swelling of the tumour caused by the treatment. Time will tell. […]
The symptoms we are seeing right now are a direct result of the tumour, hopefully due to it swelling, and the steroids will fix this. They are also what we would see if it has grown.
It really, really looks that her wellness is linked directly to how much steroid she is receiving. And here's another example of something that is…desperately, desperately wrong at the Clinic. The patient is being told that the tumor is swelling because of the treatment. How is it that only at the Burzynski Clinic that getting worse is indistinguishable from getting better? Second point: this is a tumor on the brainstem. If a possible side effect were swelling of the thing pressing against the brainstem, you'd expect that to be on the informed consent form, right? The type of thing that would be among the "serious side effects," right? It's not, at least not in a version of the consent form used after Amelia had started ANP:
(Burzynski's supporters who have been saying that the treatment has no long-term side effects would do well to look at that first paragraph. The paperwork that every patient signs says it can have exactly that.)
On September 5th, we see a candid moment on the facebook page. The parents are committed to seeing this therapy through, but the father has that lingering awareness that this nothing the tumor has not shrunk:
Whether we have returned to a feeling of optimism or not remains to be seen. I still feel uneasy about the fact that we are so far on without the tumour shrinking. It is frustrating, because we have worked SO hard with the treatment – our entire lives are ruled by it and it is almost a full time job sorting it all out – we just share it between us and make it happen. We just know to be patient, and we 100% know it can work.
At this time, Amelia was returning to school (she had already been going to nursery school on treatment). And the way it appeared in the press, and certainly how I and other skeptics read it, it was being promoted as, "See? This treatment is working enough to let this little girl go back," a human interest story (The Mirror's coverage was profoundly disgraceful–suggesting UK doctors "refused to treat" Amelia, whereas when you look above you see that in fact: "The doctors here are being very cooperative – but I must emphasise that they are recommending different treatment (chemo) and we have consistently turned this down"), and by god it was good to hear that Amelia was having a great time, but there's a lot more going on than is contained in the articles. On the 5th we see how much support was needed to get Amelia in. This was not the return of a healed child that everyone took away from the coverage:
"There has been a LOT of organising around this, far more than getting a healthy child to school. We've arranged our nanny, we've had to work around the school timetable, we've had meetings with the school and the teachers and the hospital nurses and made everything happen. The school have been absolutely fantastic every step of the way – we literally cannot fault them."
On the 8th, we see on the Facebook page:
"On Monday we have a physiotherapist coming to look at her to see if she can get her walking again. I tried a little walking with her today and she is really, really trying. You can see she struggles, like her brain doesn't know how to do it but the conscious Amelia that we see and know does. It's a bit like trying to write with the wrong hand – you know what to do but you can't quite make your hand write as well as the other. She tries to walk, but can't quite make it all fit."
This is not a child improving.
September 10, on they were visited by Eric Merola for his utterly uncritical documentary about Burzynski. More on that in a moment.
On the morning of the 15th, Amelia woke up crying with a pain in her head. She went off treatment for a day or so and got better, not trembling, perhaps speaking a bit better. One wonders if she is not experiencing relief from the hypernatremia that can appear alongside such massive sodium doses and can have such side effects.
Amelia has a great couple of days in late September (and she really takes to her school!), and her dad talks about how the awful waiting game goes in between MRIs, which I have learned is how time is measured by cancer patients:
I've said this many times before, but the really frustrating thing for me is not having anything really tangible that tells you this is working, until we get the scan image in front of us. This means an 8 week wait between scans when you really have no idea what is going on, and if she gets worse like she did a few weeks back then I think you naturally assume the worst. Then she gets better, and you relax a little!
The October MRI shows no change. But later that month, the family is trying to come to grips with what life will mean in the likelihood that Amelia is not with them. It's a beautiful post, and I hope you read it. It's immensely sad and healthy and you can't help but feel the full force of their grief and fear. This family is mentally preparing themselves for a horrible future, and this makes what happened next absolutely inexcusable by any measure.
By November 19th, Amelia's right hand is immobilized, a clear progression, and the family gets the results of a recent scan:
What I don't want to do is get ours, and everybody else's hopes up about things. I could not bear thinking that this is working and then to be told it isn't. (emphasis added)
What I will elude to is that the Burzynski clinic feel that there is a cyst forming inside Amelia's tumour, very slowly. This does seem apparent on the scan images but we want to make sure this has grown over the longer timeframe. A cyst will form where there is cell breakdown, so clearly is a good thing from a 'killing the tumour' viewpoint, but possibly bad in that you then have fluid in a very difficult place to get to. We'll address that little hurdle if we get to it being a problem in the first place.
This sounds exciting (it is), but we are really trying to be careful about getting too much so. Amelia has got worse, although she has had some improvement over the weeks before her MRI. This could be due to a number of factors and we know the tumour has not grown.
Another point with this is that the tumour isn't shrinking, but if a cyst is forming then it might be some time before the tumour does shrink. We've always said that due to Amelia's tumour being very slow growing, we have more time on our hands more than most kids who get this.
When this news was released on the family's Facebook page, followed by rapturous confirmation the next day, it was brought the the attention of Orac at Respectful Insolence, who gave an honest medical opinion:
It pains me greatly to do this, because, no matter how I write this, it will be perceived as trying to take away the hope for Amelia's survival that the Saunders family holds. Such is not my intent, by any stretch of the imagination. However, these "cysts" almost certainly represent areas of ischemia (low blood flow) leading to tissue death as the tumor outgrows its blood supply. This is a phenomenon commonly seen in advanced malignancy. I know this because tumor angiogenesis ia one of my areas of research interest. […]
Sadly, then, seeing "cysts" growing in Amelia's tumor most likely says nothing one way or the other about whether or not it's responding to Burzynski's antineoplastons. That's assuming that Burzynski's interpretation of the scans is even correct, which I wouldn't bet money on. Most likely, these "cysts" indicate that there is no therapeutic effect. I take no pleasure in saying this, but most likely this is true.
Amelia's dad was understandably upset and actually responded to Orac on Nov 29th, but the day after Orac posted, the family updated their followers:
We know that some people doubt what we are doing. We understand that it is in human nature to question, and many people will not just take something on faith alone. But, ultimately, this is our choice. And that choice seems to be paying off.
Yesterday I sent a CD with the latest MRI scans on to our local oncologist and I'll be waiting for their opinion. We'll consider this, and then continue until the next scan and see if the cystic formation that we have been shown grows in some way. I don't want anyone to think we just take things at face value and accept them – we consider what we see, what we are told, and get as many opinions as we can. We can see with our own eyes though that something has changed with the tumour and we hope this continues. Amelia's tumour hasn't enhanced or progressed, so we know it is unlikely to be anything other than cysts, but we will get that second opinion for sure.
Amelia had a magical week. She won a community award, the "Child of Courage" award, and was literally the star of a Nativity play with her friends. The reality of Amelia's situation soon came upon the family, however. On 2 December:
The truth is, Amelia isn't getting any better neurologically. We live with her every day and we see it. She is very slowly deteriorating and I think we would be putting our own heads in the sand if we didn't accept this. On one hand we have the Burzynski clinic who believe the tumour is beginning to die. We are getting opinions here about this theory and we'll very likely need another scan of a different type in early January to back this up. Everything is based on opinions – and nobody agrees, which makes it all very hard on us.
And the final assessment from the Great Ormond Street Hospital:
We had our meeting at Great Ormond Street yesterday and, sadly, they just don't have anything for us. We kind of knew this before we went – but wondered if they might have a trial that we could take part in. Unfortunately they don't.
They felt that Amelia is in the latter stages of the disease, and that what is called 'progression' has already started. This means her tumour is growing, the cancer is spreading and we don't have a huge amount of time left. Again we had already guessed this was happening but it was good in a way to have another opinion of this.
Were it just a one-off bad interpretation of an MRI on the part of the Burzynski Clinic, we might have been able to write this off as a simple mistake. But it's not. Not by a long shot.
- We first noticed this pattern in the story of Amelia S.
- The family of Haley S heard this (also, see the clinic's heartless reaction to a stroke that the child had).
- The Clinic gave the same prognosis to Justin B's family in 2006.
- We see a similar cyst in Leslie S.'s story (2006), and it nabbed Burzynski an extra $7,500 before she died.
- We see it AGAIN–as far back as 1994!–in Cody G.'s story.
- We saw it again in the case of Samantha T.
- We saw it again in the story of Christy M.
- A similar story came from Georgia State Senator Ed G.'s story.
- In the most grotesque horror show we've ever written about, Burzynski himself tells the family of Chase S. the same thing. Poor Chase ended up lying in state in his family's front room for months.
Had Burzynski not used this line on the family who had given him by far the most publicity of any other in years, this recurring theme might have slipped by unnoticed. But it's clear that this is not just a coincidence, it's an M.O. predicated on false hope that strings parents and patients along. And it's been going on for decades! And it leaves patients utterly crushed and confused. The few skeptics who have been working these stories in their spare time have found case after case of patients thinking that getting worse is getting better (a partial, growing list can be found in this post). Consider that the cases written up at this website represent 1/10th of the total cases we've been able to find and will be bringing to you, that we have only found a small fraction of cases, mostly from the most recent years, and that this guy has been operating for over 35 years! My god! Imagine what that means!
In light of this, when Eric Merola, in his new movie, says in a series of title cards:
Two months after this interview, Amelia's tumor began to swell and fill with fluid.
There was confusion and disagreement among between their local radiologists and the radiologists in Houston, [sic] about why this was happening–
So her parents decided to discontinue antineoplaston therapy.
[Then he cuts to a picture of Amelia's obituary and says,]
"Amelia passed away with her parents by her side on January 6, 2013."
…it is fundamentally dishonest. There was no confusion. There was the right diagnosis and Burzynski's diagnosis, a story that's been spun for decades to desperate parents, and it's a goddamned disgrace that Merola suggests that the parents' evidence-based decision could have been related in any way to the outcome.
Instead of the usual plea for a donation to St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, which researches children's tumors and provides care for free, we'd like to ask you to make a donation to Naomi House, the children's hospice center that cared for Amelia's family in the last days and which seems to be the family's preferred charity.
If you want to take action, protect the vulnerable, and put reliable information in front of patients who might be looking into this Clinic, the Skeptics for the Protection of Cancer Patients (facebook page here) have put up guidelines about how to boost good information into Burzynski's search results.


text:
My shiny new Garmin 310xt arrived yesterday evening. I've taken it out for a spin and, dang, I'm in love. This is my third training watch (previous models include a Polar RS300 and a Garmin 305, both of which bit the dust).
It seems a tradition among runners to name their watches. So I'll jump on the bandwagon, but with your help.
Filed under: clothes and gear | 13 Comments »


text:
Humans can rearrange the shape of our planet almost as easily as the furniture in your living room (or the deck chairs on the Titanic). Of course, it doesn't always work out as planned.
A lot of Earth terraforming is a simple matter of moving water to places where there was no water, and moving land to places that were previously landless. On the surface, this kind of terraforming seems generally beneficial, especially compared to some of the more harmful methods mentioned in part 1.
The earliest artificial islands are Neolithic in origin. Scots were building crannógs 5,000 years ago. These small islands were built up with timber, stone and earth until a stable, round structure suitable for building a house upon was formed. 20th and 21st-century artificial islands are much larger. They can be tourist destinations (Montreal's Île Notre-Dame), urban neighborhoods (San Francisco's Treasure Island), industrial centers (Seattle's Harbor Island), or even entire provinces (Flevoland in the Netherlands). Most of them are constructed using fill dredged from nearby bodies of water or leftover material from construction projects such as grade leveling or tunneling. Île Notre-Dame, for instance, was built from 15 million tons of rock cleared from the digging of the Montreal Metro tunnels.
These kinds of artificial islands are relatively innocuous (I'm sure the level 5 vegans among us can dredge up some objections). U Thant Island isn't really hurting anyone. If you build your fake island on a landfill, however, you've got problems. Landfill islands seem like a win-win. Take tons of garbage and make it into something useful, a nice green island where we can go casino gambling all day long. Unfortunately, chemicals tend to leach out of landfills into nearby groundwater. Plus, landfills are giant methane factories. The vent pipes sticking out are part of our grand experiment to see if we can alter global climate with greenhouse gases.
It's also kind of weird when islands are given symbolic shapes, like the Dubai Waterfront project, which will be shaped like a giant Islamic crescent, or Dubai's Palm Islands, which are clearly alien face huggers. It isn't quite writing your name on the moon with a laser, but it still feels a bit like planetary defacement.
Irrigation is a technology that's tough to talk trash about – human civilization wouldn't have made it very far without it. It's allowed us to settle previously barren areas, and more importantly made crop yields more resistant to short-term rainfall fluctuations. We need irrigation. But just to prove that you really can have too much of a good thing, massive irrigation projects played out over the course of decades have devastating environmental effects. Sometimes we can't see the effects – the Ogallala Aquifer has greatly diminished water levels – but they're still there. Other times the effects are all too obvious. Have you seen the Aral Sea lately? Neither has anyone else. In the 1960s, the Soviet Union started diverting water from the Aral and the rivers that feed it. Today, for all intents and purposes, the Aral Sea no longer exists.
The above NASA image shows the Aral Sea's remnants in 2008, with the sea's approximate 1989 area outlined in blue.
So we can move things around. We can expand our cities with reclaimed land (and there are those greenhouse gases again). We can irrigate deserts. But at human scales, Earth is a closed system. We can drain in decades what took millennia to fill, and there's no easy way to put it back. Consider that the Earth itself is really sturdy. We can add millions of tons of water to an area by creating a reservoir, or build a landmass where there wasn't one, and the planet doesn't really sweat it too much. What happens when we start messing with ecosystems? We'll get to that in part 3.
Read Terraforming Earth, Pt. 1
NASA. "Palm Island Resort."
The Scottish Crannog Centre. "What is a Crannog?"
APEC. "The Ogallala Aquifer and Its Role as a Threatened American Resource."


text:
Mini Ibiza Chain
Regular price
+ Details
Materials: Silver 925, Enamel
Weight: 15 g
Materials: Silver 925, Enamel
Finishing: 18 K Gold plating
Color: Black
Length: 43 cm
Weight: 15 g
Product Code: 03-CHAIN02-BLCK
Wear casually to add playful mood to any of your outfits. Absolute must have.
+ Shipping
Worldwide shipping is free of charge. Delivery in EU takes 2-5 days, delivery to US takes 7 days.
All import taxes and duties are included.
+ About Collection
Playground Collection was created to immerse in the childhood memories, when all objects around us were colourful and full of variations to play with. The Collection was born out of the mutual desire to create jewelry that is as playful as ready-to-wear and that maintains the same level of craftsmanship and exquisite attention to detail. Playground represents incredible work with bright colours and mixing different materials together to create something very unique and special.


text:
Hoax Bombs
Penal Code
P.C. 46.08 Hoax Bombs
(a) A person commits an offense if the person knowingly manufactures, sells, purchases, transports, or possesses a hoax bomb with intent to use the hoax bomb to:
(1) make another believe that the hoax bomb is an explosive or incendiary device; or
(2) cause alarm or reaction of any type by an official of a public safety agency or volunteer agency organized to deal with emergencies.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.