text:
Jason Bendickson
January 15, 2017 / Creativity Inside the Box / Sara Wolbrecht, Kim Saunders, Levi Bilderback
Friends, how are you? Good, good. If you were here last week then you know that we launched a vision for where we're headed in the next few months as a community, and it is to launch Thrive Teams, our version of small groups, by March 1st, as we begin the season of Lent. A season where we'll read a book together as a community on prayer, and let that fuel our Sunday morning content, a season lasting six weeks that will take us to Easter Sunday. A season where these Thrive Teams – which will hopefully include as many of us as possible – these teams will not only be a place to grow in relationship with God, and deepen connections and inside jokes and vulnerability with each other, but also to be teams of people who coalesce around an area of ministry, a passion for which to take the lead and responsibility in helping take Salt House to the next level, where God really shows us what's possible, what can be done, in community like this one.
Which is why, for January and February, to get us ready for that – we are working through a paradigm shift together, looking at unleashing our collective, creative potential into what it means for us to be community, a community that shows up to creatively be the love and grace and justice of Jesus here and now. We're calling it Force of Nature. When we show up, with the creativity God has designed us for – it is a force indeed.
And so today. On this journey of exploring the Force of Nature that is community, we have the great privilege to hear two voices from our Salt House family. From both you will hear more about their stories, their own wrestling through who God has made them to be as a creative force in this world. It is so good for us to share our own journeys with each other because God uses those stories to teach and inspire us. And you'll also hear from them, they'll each offer an invitation, an opportunity – and maybe it will be for you.
And the first voice is Kim Saunders. You see Kim here on Sundays playing with the band. You have also seen her in action as the head of our Leadership Team, maintaining key roles in the development of the New Bethlehem Day Center (serving homeless families in our basement), and now with our decision to sell a portion of our land to become a 24-7 shelter for families and women experiencing homelessness. There is so very much she does behind the scene that I am so grateful for. She won't tell you all of that, but she will speak of some of the other paths her life has taken – we listen together, hearing what God has to say to us through Kim's journey. Thank you, Kim!
Creativity Inside The Box
The scripture I'd like to explore today is from the gospel of Luke, chapter 2. From The Message version:
Luke 2:19 Mary kept all these things to herself, holding them dear, deep within herself.
And the second part of Luke 2:51 His mother held these things dearly, deep within herself.
I was born an introvert. I find joy by myself, exercising, reading, thinking, being. Like Mary, I hold things deep inside - the essence of me hidden from sight, a secret, a mystery. As a child I felt radically different than my parents and three siblings and by extension most of humanity. But being a mystery wasn't a bad thing. I thought about that deeply buried essence of me as a black box of magic from which power would emerge at surprising times in unexpected ways. But in the past few years, I have begun to discover a new, or maybe just a more expanded, truth about myself and that magical black box. It turns out that I am far more than an introvert, and that for most of my life I have mislabeled that black box.
When I was 16 years old I went off to college at the University of Virginia. I went there to join the Echols Scholar program, which allowed students to build their own curriculum across every school in the university. This was perfect for a student like me, who had graduated from an accelerated high school program for math and science but spent every free moment in a land far, far away, accompanying choirs on piano, or acting on stage, or hiding away somewhere reading. As an Echols Scholar I ended up taking classes in engineering, in architecture, in design, neurobiology, environmental studies, English, music, physics, yes really… and then spent many hours a week immersed in bridging my passion for black music and culture and a white Southern student body. Outside of the U.Va. sports teams, the show choir I founded and named Musique was the only integrated group on campus. 16 singers, 8 dancers, 10 instrumentalists that performed on campus, on local TV, around the region; I was crazy busy. But I had a secret. The hours in the dark of night when I was supposed to be sleeping – those were prime time for my best work. I would carefully lay out freshly sharpened #2 pencils and a crisp yellow pad, set my alarm clock, and go to sleep. I would wake to the alarm every two hours, get up and write until I stopped, then go back to sleep. Write, sleep, write, sleep. And then the magic. When I got up in the morning I would read what I had written. And without fail it would be something surprising. An idea I didn't remember considering, a setting I knew nothing about, a theorem I had never thought through, a story of a girl or boy or family that I didn't recognize. This was my secret, my black box full of the most amazing things, unique only to me, magic. Nothing I owned or could really take credit for. Simply magic.
I knew about God. My family was Christian. My red-haired engineer dad and athletic, artsy mom brought my two brothers, my sister and me to House Church, a small United Church of Christ community that met in state parks, retreat centers and living rooms. We had celebration, not worship, social justice was the heartbeat of the community, and my mother's beautiful calligraphy inscribed every "God is love" church communication I saw until I was 10. That year I was asked by my elementary school choir director to play piano for his church choir at Peace Lutheran Church, a job which I had for almost six years, until I left for college.
Even though I knew the language of Christianity, my creative black box wasn't about God or love – it was simply unexplainable magic.
After college I went out a built a life. I got married to Raynard, my Musique assistant director, had five bi-racial children, got divorced, fell in love again and married Michelle, my wife. I toured as a keyboard player, ran a consulting business, wrote two books on database design, spent 18 years as a senior manager at Microsoft, did church music, and went all-in as a parent growing a community with and around my kids as they did music, sports, and theater. I exercised my creative skills in everything I touched, but what I didn't do was pay much attention to that magical black box which faded way into the background of my sense of self.
Several years ago my son Heath and I were working together on a community production of the musical Les Miserables. After several shows where he had been my assistant, now he was the music director and conductor, and I was playing keyboards in his orchestra pit. There was a young man who was a reed player, studying music in college, who had been in productions with us previously. During this production, however, his sister was also in the pit playing viola. And when they interacted with each other, Heath and I witnessed something surprising. The young man suddenly appeared much younger than his 21 years, and a lot more awkward. When we asked the director what was up, she responded that the young man was on the autism spectrum, and had been profoundly impaired from a very early age. Heath and I were both shocked to think that this young man, a competent, friendly, somewhat weird musician like all of us, had a diagnosis of autism. And we both were fascinated by the question of how this might be – how a person could receive a diagnosis that often profoundly limits their potential, and yet grow up to engage in the world far beyond those limitations. Heath was inspired to explore this question musically, while I noodled on the idea of a novel, developing characters and setting and a storyline. We both wondered: when does a diagnosis help, and when does it hurt? Within a few months we had come together and agreed to collaborate on a single piece of musical theater, combining his early musical ideas and my story ideas. This collaboration became Newton's Cradle, a full-length musical about Evan Newton, a young man on the spectrum, and his family.
Newton's Cradle is more to me than a piece of art. It is my gateway into a new life. Writing it turned me inside out.
I was immersed already in empty-nesting. My youngest twin daughters were at college, I had recently left Microsoft and begun exploring new work options. But now I had to figure out how to collaborate as a peer with my son, despite feeling both an unequal partner to his giftedness, training and experience, and an over-developed sense of parental responsibility for our joint outcome. I had to actively clear away the cobwebs and oil the rusty hinges on my old black box of creativity. I had to figure out how to sustain my marriage through a major shift in my focus and sense of self.
But oh, what I discovered. First of all, over time the writing took on its own life as it became more and more clear that the characters were writing their own story. And surprises emerged as we settled into the rhythm of our collaboration; I would send Heath a scene, and he would send back some music, and then we would iterate together around those things. In the handoffs, he would see things in what I wrote that I hadn't been aware of, and I would see things in his work that surprised him as well, but these surprises had a sense of inevitability. It was like we were both looking at the same thing but neither of us had sufficient perspective to capture it all on our own. The magical black box that had been buried in me was re-emerging, and I felt it surrounding both of us. Or more accurately, I sensed a merging of his creativity and mine.
At the same time as I embarked on my new journey into creativity, our new Salt House community was emerging. I was excited to see us venture more deeply into what Brian McLaren writes about in his book The Great Spiritual Migration, wherein our prime contribution to humanity shifts from teaching correct beliefs to practicing the way of love as Jesus taught, where church becomes a school of love.
Today that creative, magical black box is becoming a little bit translucent. It isn't that I understand it any more, or that I can predict what's inside with any new certainty. But I have named it differently.
Today I call that creative, magical black box God.
I had been living my old understanding of Luke 2:19 Mary kept all these things to herself, holding them dear, deep within herself. I had thought I was introverted, coping with the demands of a large family. making things happen outside, and storing things up on the inside. Holding on.
But other translations of Luke 2:19 don't describe Mary as "holding" these things inside. Instead, they reference "pondering," "dwelling on," and "meditating." Instead of a passive holding on, Mary is actually making an active choice that prepares her for what is to come. And, the small difference between Luke 2:19 and Luke 2:51 also points that direction. Instead of focusing on the what of holding, here Luke focused on the how of dearly – His mother held these things dearly, deep within herself. "Dearly" in other translations references "treasuring" and "keeping in her heart," much more an act of love.
Today, I name my magical black box God the creator. I experience creative collaboration with my son as a space where the magical creator God is active. I experience my creative collaboration with our growing church community as evidence that the magical creator God is not just active, but guiding.
It turns out that I am far more than an introvert. I am a co-creator who was made not only to hold things inside, but to form and share them with others. And I know this magical creator space lives not only inside of me and Heath. Whatever the name, the creator space also lives in you. It is the gift given by our Creator to all of us, we humans who are made in God's creative image.
And I give thanks every day for the chance to experience and experiment with it, and Him.
God, thank you for Kim's story – and how it reveals our own. That we are co-creators, made not only to hold things inside, but to form and share them with others. Thank you, thank you for the chance to experience and experiment with it, and with you, and with each other. Continue to speak to us about how we might co-create with you in our relationships, in our work, in our play, in our time here as a part of this new community. Thank you. Amen.
Friends, this Thursday you can get a sneak peek into seeing Newton's Cradle – for all the ways we are now obsessed with Hamilton, think of what it would have been like to see an early video of that show before it made it big. This is that kind of opportunity. We are doing it here, this Thursday. We'll start the video at 6:30pm, but come early with some food to share, potluck style, as we'll eat and talk and then keep eating while we watch, together. It'll be about 2 hours, including an intermission. Folks with little ones – you can always come and stay for as long as you can.
Now, we continue to hold what Kim has shared with us as we open ourselves to hear and be challenged by more.
Rewind to last spring. As we celebrated our first birthday as a church – Salt House turned one year old! – we committed to three months of intentionally identifying our emerging sense of mission and identity at Salt House. So much beautiful work came out of that time – and I won't get into all of it. But one of the dreams that emerged was the dream of developing a community garden.
But here's the thing: we all loved the idea, but none of us had that knowledge, experience, green thumb necessary to really lead that. But we sensed it was something God was forming in us as a way to use our land, engage our neighborhood, serve the day center, and be more engaged in the very soil of this place that is ours.
Then in July. In walk Levi and Kaylee Bilderback on a Sunday morning. And even more than the synergy we've found in having leaders who will lead a Thrive Team for our community garden, even more than that gratitude I feel for what they'll do, I feel it for who they are. And the humble, playful, vulnerable ways in which they have shown up here in community. I've asked Levi to share just a few minutes about his story in getting to this place, and then let you what's coming up for our community garden.
Levi Bilderback – Finding God in the Garden
God, thank you for the great gift of pulling together our longing for a garden, and Levi and Kaylee's courage to walk through these doors. As we dream about what you'll do in the soil of this place, we are mindful of how grateful we are to have this place, this land, this community, where you plant seeds – literally and figuratively. Thank you, for all the ways you challenge us to grow, to keep on, to find the work that we can enjoy – may we, like Levi, do just that.
Friends, the Community Garden will be one of the Thrive Teams available to us in a few weeks. Stay tuned for more. Thank you, Levi.
Finally, to close our time, and to weave a final thread through what we've heard today, we're turning back to this painting. Painted live during worship on the four Sundays of Advent by Dani Dodge. Dani designed each of the constellations to have deep meaning – specifically around what it means to be community. And so we are revealing the meaning of one constellation each week for January and February.
And today, we talk about the lower body of a Greek Man. You see it there? Dani wrote this about it: Lower Body of a Greek Man: "While Greece and Rome at their height were still male-dominated societies, they show us the first signs of a successful Democracy. They were not without faults, but it was a different way of operating in a community. They got creative." -Dani Dodge
This is a good week for us to talk about creative democracy. Tomorrow we honor the life and work of Martin Luther King Jr, and the freedoms he fought for that continues to be threatened today, and then on Friday is the inauguration of our next President, Donald Trump. And in light of what feels like a great tension between those things, and again in weaving in what we've heard from Kim and Levi and the journey we're on as a community who will mobilize into teams soon, I want to close with this quote from President Obama's farewell on Tuesday. Can you hold all of those threads together, as we hear this? Let's do it:
"The most important office in a democracy is the citizen. So, you see, that's what our democracy demands. It needs you. Not just when there's an election, not just when you own narrow interest is at stake, but over the full span of a lifetime. If you're tired of arguing with strangers on the Internet, try talking with one of them in real life. If something needs fixing, then lace up your shoes and do some organizing. If you're disappointed by your elected officials, grab a clip board, get some signatures, and run for office yourself. Show up, dive in, stay at it." President Barack Obama, Farewell Address
My friends, in the creative democracy that is Salt Houseit is a deep joy and honor to do life here with Kim, with Levi, with Linnea in the sound booth, with Jill and Bob and Michelle leading our kids, with Nancy in the kitchen, with David serving communion – and like Kim and Levi we all show up here with different stories, different passions, different histories with God. So let's be perfectly clear that the story we're attempting to write together at Salt House is one where we show up, dive in, and stay at it – by the grace and power of God. And we bring the creativity we're made for – and watch as God makes beautiful things of it. I do not look forward to Friday. But I do know that God co-creates with us as we show up in the creative democracy of Salt House, in the creative democracy of our country, in all of it.
Let's pray...


text:
We kicked off our 2017 summer wedding season just a few weeks ago with this gorgeous wedding celebrated at Poortjie venue in Heidelberg. Sharone chose an array of colours to showcase throughout her wedding with beautiful floral creations. The day was full of vibrant fun colour and the wedding matched that feel throughout the day!
VENUE | Poortjie Venue MUA | Jeanri Bolleurs FLOWERS & STYLING | Myrrh & Hedgehog VIDEOGRAPHY | White Motion Films

subset: commoncrawl


text:
As one of the leading contributing chapters, Hinsdale carries the torch with their annual fundraiser entitled Tablescapes. Every year for the past 17 years, this dynamic chapter has worked tirelessly to present this event each Spring.
Do you know an 8th- 12th grader interested in the Junior Board? Click Here for an Application!


text:
Saturday, May 23, 2015
Whitsunday at Kirchstetten (selection) WH Auden
…In the onion tower overhead
bells clash at the Elevation,
calling on Austria to change: whether the world has improved
is doubtful, but we believe it could
and the divine Tiberius didn't. Rejoice, the bells
cry to me. Blake's Old Nobodaddy
in his astronomic telescopic heaven,
the Big White Christian upstairs is dead,
and won't come hazing us no more, nor bless our bombs:
no more need sons of the menalty
diving their future from plum stones, count aloud
Army, Navy, Law, Church …
2 comments:
- JCF said...
In Ireland, Pentecost came a day early! [In *spite* of The Church, as the Holy Spirit is wont to do. ;-/]
Funny, I was just quoting Auden in a post about 20 minutes ago (as found in Hymn 463, which I think the killjoy bishops of the (Anglican!) Church of Ireland should reflect upon:
"He is the Way.
Follow him through the Land of Unlikeness;
you will see rare beasts and have unique adventures.
He is the Truth.
Seek him in the Kingdom of Anxiety;
you will come to a great city that has expected your return for years.
He is the Life.
Love him in the World of the Flesh;
and at your marriage all its occasions shall dance for joy."
- May 24, 2015 at 4:16 AM
- JCF said...
Dennis Hastert. You wanna say anything, Doug, or is this case of Yet Another F@cking Case of a ***F@cked-Up*** Rethuglican Phobe beyond comment?
- May 30, 2015 at 12:17 AM


text:
im not wearing boots!!
{moms vintage shirt, stripe tank from brazil, same shorts, saltwater sandals, house of harlow ring, necklace from friend}
here is miss pen's special picture for the day...
3x the fun
3x the fun
i also scored this little side table at goodwill
in love.
thats all...as of late.
more vintage sneak-peek-a-roo's coming soon!!
Toot a loo's
Taylor Sue


text:
No products in the cart.
Home/Accessories/Photography Accessories
Leica Finger Loop for Handgrip M (Large)
- Enhanced Stability and Security
- Ergonomic Control
- Strong, Comfortable Rubber Design
- Screws into M-series Handgrips
- For the Leica M Digital Rangefinder
In stock
The Large Finger Loop for Handgrip M from Leica is a sturdy rubber finger loop that attaches to the Handgrip M or Multifunctional Handgrip M and allows for improved handling of the Leica M Digital Rangefinder. The Finger Loop screws into the side of either handgrip and provides enhanced stability and security when shooting with the Leica M, especially when shooting with heavier lenses or shooting one-handed. Depending on your finger size and comfort level, you can place two or three fingers through the loop and keep your index finger free to press the shutter. The Finger Loop comes in small, medium or large sizes.
|Package Weight
|0.05 lbs
|Package Dimensions
|3.3 x 3.2 x 0.9 in
|Box Dimensions (LxWxH)
3.3 x 3.2 x 0.9″
|Package Weight
0.05 lb
There are no reviews yet.
Be the first to review "Leica Finger Loop for Handgrip M (Large)"
You must be logged in to post a comment.


text:
PACCAR Leasing Showcases Medium Duty "Value-Spec" at NPTC/
CINCINNATI, April 27, 2015 – PACCAR Leasing Company (PacLease) has announced an innovative medium-duty leasing program, called the PacLease Value Spec. The program is being showcased at the National Private Truck Council (NPTC) convention in Cincinnati.
"We're seeing continued growth in the U.S. and Canadian medium duty lease market – especially in the Class 6 segment since drivers are not required to have CDLs," said Rick Walden, PacLease's director of sales. "Leasing continues to be a popular option for many operators. To meet the need, we have two of the finest medium duty vehicles in the industry, with the Peterbilt Model 330 and Kenworth T270. By working with our suppliers, and the applications engineers at Kenworth and Peterbilt, we've been able to package a cost-effective lease program that is extremely competitive in the marketplace. What's more, the spec was done with weight in mind – these trucks are very low in weight to maximize payload. All told, our Value Spec package will turn heads by offering the premier medium duty products, optimum performance and competitive lease rates."
Powered by the PACCAR PX-7 engine, rated at 220 hp and matched with an Allison 5-speed automatic, the PacLease Value Spec is especially suited for the food and beverage industry. "We're working with body suppliers and we have a fast-tracking program in place so our customers can get the bodies installed typically within two weeks," said Walden. "That means a customer can custom order a Value Spec truck from us and have it delivered weeks if not months sooner than if they were to order the stock truck themselves. If a customer needs a medium-duty truck immediately, our franchises are well-equipped with rental units – that means we can very likely get them into a short- or long-term rental to meet immediate delivery needs."
According to Walden, PacLease offers the full line of heavy- and medium-duty Kenworth and Peterbilt models. "This goes down to Class 5 and up to Class 8, and we offer cabover models in Class 6 and 7 applications for those customers needing a truck with a tight turning radius for inner-city deliveries," he said.
Industry studies have shown a continued shift toward full-service leasing, especially with private fleets. "According to the 2014 NPTC benchmarking study, full-service leasing is at an all-time high with private fleets," said Walden. "More than 66 percent of NPTC members use full-service leasing to some degree, up from 59 percent five years ago. We expect that trend to continue. Positive trends are also coming out of specific vocations. The recent Beverage World magazine fleet survey pointed out that five years ago, about 32 percent of beverage operators leased some of their trucks. Today that number is at 42 percent. The increase in leasing with bottlers is even more dramatic – only 11 percent leased some of their trucks five years ago and today it's 43 percent."
About PacLease and PACCAR
PACCAR Leasing Company (PacLease) is one of the fastest-growing commercial truck leasing companies in the transportation industry. PacLease has independent and company-owned full-service leasing locations throughout the United States, Canada, Mexico and Europe. PacLease provides customized full-service lease, rental and contract maintenance programs designed to meet the specific needs of customers. A combination of reliable, custom-built trucks and complete service offerings allows customers to maximize the value of their transportation resources.
PACCAR Leasing is a part of the financial services group of PACCAR Inc, a global technology leader in the design, manufacture and customer support of high-quality light-, medium- and heavy-duty trucks under the Kenworth, Peterbilt and DAF nameplates. PACCAR shares are traded on the Nasdaq Stock Market, symbol PCAR, and its homepage can be found at www.paccar.com.


text:
The Eddyline Bistro Cafe is the perfect place to enjoy a beautifully prepared dinner with friends or to chill out on the weekend over a leisurely brunch. When the weather is fine, enjoy your meal on the deck and soak in the fabulous view of Hudson Bay Mountain. Please click on our 'Menus' link above to check out our current menus!
Weekend brunch at the Eddyline is second to none! Our take on the classic Eggs Benedict is a favourite with the locals as well as visitors, and there are many other delicious brunch choices.
Spend an evening at the Eddyline Bistro and enjoy beautifully prepared dinner French-inspired cuisine. Our menu showcases local specialties like Bulkley Valley free-range grass-fed beef and seafood from BC's north coast. Our Sommelier offers an ever-changing wine menu that includes some top BC wines as well as international cellar selections. Our selection of beers includes Canadian craft brewery offerings as well as imports.
Beans sourced from JJ Bean turned into the tastiest coffee North of Whistler.
Our desserts include French classics, from tarts to tasty truffles, to filled Macarons!
With seating for 50, fabulous food, a liquor license, and a knowledgeable Sommelier, the Eddyline Bistro Cafe is the ideal venue for your next event. We will work with you to develop the perfect menu for your celebration. As well we also provide off-site catering services. Give us a call to talk about ideas, details and dates.
Fill out the form below with your event details and we'll be in touch.
Join us for a relaxing evening, great drinks and fantastic food!
Join us for a relaxing evening, great drinks and fantastic food!
Our dinner menu changes frequently depending on the season and ingredients and features many beautifully prepared dishes.
To stay up-to-date on daily specials and new menus, you can 'like' us on FaceBook, contact us at firstname.lastname@example.com or call us at 250.877.0122.
excellent team = fabulous food & a wonderful dining experience
excellent team = fabulous food & a wonderful dining experience
7391 Highway 16 W
Smithers, BC
Take a piece of Eddyline art home with you!
Take a piece of Eddyline art home with you!
Many of the latte cups and mugs used for our premium coffee's have been hand crafted by Susan Clay-Smith. She holes up in her home studio whenever possible to create some artful pieces. You can often purchase mugs to take home from The Eddyline and you may find her work in various other locations in Smithers.


text:
Need expat info for USA?
US Utilities
In the past, each region in the US had one electric company which was responsible for providing all households with electricity. Today, due to deregulation, you can compare costs and services and choose the US utilities provider which suits you best. If you are unsure, your friends, neighbors, landlord or real estate agent can probably recommend a company that offers good value for money. Of course, you can also contact the different providers directly and ask about available rates.
If that is the case, you should also ask about their billing options. They might offer budget billing, which gives you a monthly bill that you have to pay on the spot. If you choose auto billing instead, your US utilities provider will deduct the amount you are supposed to pay from your account or bill it to your credit card. If your new home had electric service in the past, turning it back on under your name should not be a big deal. In many cases, it can be done with just a phone call. Make sure to make that phone call way ahead of time. Some US utilities companies need a few working days to set up your connection. On top of that, you might have to wait even longer during the peak moving times in summer. Ask your US utilities provider to confirm the date when they will connect your new place to their system and tell them exactly when you will move in.
The Biggest Electricity Providers in the US
The 10 biggest electricity companies in the United States are the following:
- Duke Energy Corporations
- PG&E Corporation
- Exelon Corporation
- Edison International
- NextEra Energy, Inc.
- Southern Company
- American Electric Power
- FirstEnergy Corp.
- Xcel Energy Inc.
- National Grid plc
Please remember that the list above is not extensive and that a smaller, local US utilities company might be able to offer you a better deal. Before you sign up with any US utilities provider, try to find out if your heat is powered by electricity as well and if you will need it much throughout the year. If heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (often referred to as HVAC) are powered by electricity as well, your bill might be a lot higher than expected.
Water and Household Waste
Who you have to turn to for running water depends largely on where you live. If your new home is in a rural area, you may receive your water from a well. If this is not the case, then you have to contact the responsible US utilities company and ask for a connection to their system. The process should not be much different from that of setting up your electricity connection. In most cases, water and sewage services are provided by your city or county. You might be asked to pay a deposit which you will get back after one year of positive payment history.
Household waste disposal should be provided by your county or city as well. Contact them as soon as possible to find out if and when the garbage truck will stop by your house and if you are required to recycle. In addition, you may have to dispose of some items at special facilities (if these items are considered hazardous, for instance) or recycling centers.
We do our best to keep this article up to date. However, we cannot guarantee that the information provided is always current or complete.


text:
I'm looking for my manual for graceful living. I think I set it down somewhere over here...
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Ready or not...
And here it is, submitted at 6:51 AM to Baker Creek Heirloom Seeds:
-----------------Individual Item Breakdown-----------------
Item Ref. Price ea. Qty. Description
Chioggia (beet)
St. Valery (carrot)
Birdhouse Gourd
Fine Verde Basil
Sweet Chocolate (sweet pepper)
Chaco Canyon (runner bean)
Oriole Orange Chard (swiss chard)
Sugar Snap (peas)
Butternut - Waltham (squash)
Turner Family Pumpkin
Lemon Squash
Aunt Ruby's German Green (tomato)
Tomatillo - Verde
Paul Robeson (tomato)
------------------------End of Order-----------------------
Not shown here, but to be added from other sources are poblano peppers, sweet potato, flat leaf parsley, and Chiapas Wild cherry tomato.
I'm going to have to expand beyond the farm and into the ornamental garden, but that's okay. I think some of the vining plants would look good there. I'll just have to watch that the dogs don't get to my harvest before I do.
I used most of the suggestions that people sent in--there were so many good ones that it was hard to edit any out! Even so, I made slight changes in a few instances. For example, scarlet runner beans, according to the seed catalog, like cool climates, so I substituted Chaco Canyon instead. Perhaps not as pretty, but a little hardier for my conditions. Other substitutions were made on the basis of availability from Baker Creek (I wanted to do as much one-stop shopping as possible).
The Chaco Canyon beans come from one of my native states, New Mexico. Seeds from this plant were unearthed in an archeological dig, and so they go way back. It feels right to plant these, both for climate/enviro reasons and cultural ones, since it ties me to a long tradition.
And how could I not grow a gourd called "Birdhouse?"
Thanks so much to everyone for all your ideas. It makes the farm a community effort and a richer experience. I'm a little overwhelmed and intimidated--I've never tried to grow an entire kitchen garden from seed before, let alone one so large. I'm excited to see how it goes.
Now I wait and check the mail...
11 comments:
I was SO excited to see a post about you on Garden Rant this morning! Congratulations. :)ReplyDelete
Susan, You look ready! gailReplyDelete
- AnonymousJanuary 14, 2009 at 8:26 AM
I'm sure it will be a great success, Susan! Sounds like a winning lineup.ReplyDelete
Really so exciting! And so community-oriented of you to solicit suggestions (and actually take them)! I hope you enjoy the work that goes into a veggie patch as much or even more than the actual harvest. The process can be frustrating at times but you learn so much each year. Can't wait to see those climbing beans on your trellis! Congrats. Oh, and I've always wanted to grow birdhouse gourds but feared our growing season is too cool/short so I will admire yours instead.ReplyDelete
Oooh, sounds like you have a wonderful garden in the making! I ordered Chaco Canyon runners as well, it really fired up my imagination. I thought about the generations that grew those beans so long ago and how special it is that we can carry that strain forward so many years later.ReplyDelete
I don't have dogs, buy gardening friends that do have experienced major damage to tomatoes from their canine buddies. The dogs don't even wait for the tomatoes to ripen.
And, I'm already picturing what you're going to make with the gourds!
Holy cow, that's a line-up, alright! Maybe you can have a huge blog-party--in person, I mean--and we can all eat your successful results!!ReplyDelete
Best of luck with it all. Of course I will be watching ;) to see how things go along!
Bravo! I'm curious whether you have the whole grow-light set-up or if you are just blessed with sunny windows. We're so tight on space (and blessed with a fabulous plant sale in May, where we usually get veggie starts) that I've never done what you're about to try. I'm going to try winter sowing though, and just bombarded my co-workers with a request for their cast-off plastic jugs so I can get going. May all these seeds grow strong!ReplyDelete
I feel hungry just reading that order! My windowsills are ready, and I have the seeds. I just need seed compost.ReplyDelete
Thanks, G4L! I love my job.ReplyDelete
And thanks, too, Nancy and Gail--it looks like a tall job though. :-)
Michelle--that's cool that you're trying the Chaco Canyons. I felt the same way about them when I read the description.
Jan--a blog-party to eat the harvest would be fun!
Lynn--I've got some very good southern light upstairs in my study. I'm hoping that will do the trick.
Victoria--go for it, and I'll be with you in spirit. After all, what have we got to lose?
I'm pouring over the seed and plant catalogs, yearning for spring. Even one little narcissus bloom would be enough right now, but I think they are weeks away. Good luck with your seeds, can't wait to see them in about 4 months...ReplyDelete
Cool collection of seeds. Let me know how the chocolate pepper grows. I have the minature and it was delicious.ReplyDelete


text:
About Sonia Tully - from her website http://www.soniatully.com
"I'm Sonia Tully and I am a fourth generation psychic astrologer and was born into a family of mystics and healers. I have trained to do psychic astrology readings with my mother, Sonia Choquette, who is a revolutionary psychic, New York Times best selling author and teacher. An astrology reading with me begins on a soul level. Through examining your chart structure and planetary placement, I use my intuition to guide you through life's many lessons. After we explore your soul lessons, gifts and life's purpose, I will be able to answer any questions you have about your chart of where you are going in your life.
A reading with me will provide insight into any obstacles you may be experiencing and help you explore your soul plan and soul history in this life. Personal readings are wonderful for anyone who wants to spark their creativity or gain insight into their life, relationships, or soul's purpose. All of my readings are done by phone. Book your personal astrology reading now by email!"
To support the juicy living tour and to watch more video interviews, visit http://www.JuicyLivingTour
Donate now to support the Juicy Living Tour at http://juicylivingtour.com/support-the-juicy-tour/donate-now/
Stay tuned on the Juicy Living Tour and where it is right now in the world from Lilou's facebook fan page at http://facebook.com/liloumacewebtv


text:
In Re: Mezerhane v. Republica Bolivariana de Venezuela, Case No. 1:11-cv-23983-MGC (S.D. Florida 2013)
Mark B. Feldman[1]
Question Presented
As one of the drafters of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (hereinafter "FSIA" or "Act"), I have been asked by counsel for plaintiff, Nelson J. Mezerhane, to provide the Court my expert opinion on the drafting and application of the expropriation exception to immunity set forth in Section 1605 (a) (3) of the Act. This Report and Opinion addresses one specific question:
Does the exception to immunity spelled out in the second clause of Section 1605 (a) (3) apply to a foreign state, such as Venezuela, so as to afford jurisdiction over that state in circumstances where the property taken in violation of international law or any property exchanged for such property is not present in the United States, but "is owned or operated by an agency or instrumentality of the foreign state and that agency or instrumentality is engaged in a commercial activity in the United States?"
Yes. Section 1605(a)(3) expressly provides, as the Executive drafters and the Congress clearly intended, that a foreign state, such as Venezuela, shall not be immune from the jurisdiction of the U.S. courts in any case in which the specified property "is owned or operated by an agency or instrumentality of the foreign state and that agency or instrumentality is engaged in a commercial activity in the United States."
I graduated from Harvard Law School in 1960 receiving an LL. B. magna cum laude, and am admitted to the bars of New York (1961) and the District of Columbia (1974). At the present time, I am Of Counsel to the law firm Garvey Schubert Barer in Washington D.C. and Adjunct Professor of Foreign Relations Law at Georgetown University Law Center. I have practiced international and foreign relations law in government and in private practice continually since I joined the U.S. State Department, Office of the Legal Adviser in May 1965. My c.v. and a list of my publications are attached (Tab A).[2]
At the State Department, I served as Assistant Legal Adviser for Inter-American Affairs (1968 -1974), Deputy Legal Adviser (1974-1980) and Acting Legal Adviser (1981). In these positions, I was responsible for advising the Secretary of State and other Department officers on many legal issues relating to foreign expropriation and international claims, foreign sovereign immunity and the federal act of state doctrine. I participated directly in the negotiation of investment disputes and claims settlements with Peru, Chile, Iran and the People's Republic of China and advised the Department on litigation relating to claims against Cuba and Iran. In the Cuban context, I drafted letters signed by the Legal Adviser stating the Department's position on the federal act of state doctrine. I also advised State Department officers serving on an inter-agency committee established by President Nixon to manage the U.S. response to the numerous expropriations of U.S. investments in developing countries during the late 1960s and 70s.
In the 1970s, I represented the United States in a number of multi-lateral negotiations relating to international investment and expropriation that took place in the United Nations and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and helped draft the 1976 OECD Declaration on International Investment. I also advised Secretary of State Henry Kissinger regarding his efforts to reach a new understanding on expropriation issues with Mexico and South American governments.
Notably, for purposes of this case, as Deputy Legal Adviser I was responsible for determinations of sovereign immunity made by the Department of State and was one of the government attorneys primarily responsible for drafting the bill that, with limited changes, was enacted by Congress in 1976 as the FSIA. Prior to the Act, courts generally deferred to Suggestions of Interest submitted by the Attorney General stating that the Department of State recognized and allowed the claim of immunity asserted by the foreign state.[3] For a time, I personally presided over administrative hearings in which immunity claims made by foreign states were contested by claimants.
President Nixon first submitted immunity legislation to Congress in January 1973. That proposal drew objections, and Congressional staff told the Department to consult with all the stakeholders and to present a new bill that would command broad consensus. The Acting Legal Adviser asked me to coordinate that effort, and I led the consultations with stakeholders and the drafting that resolved most of the issues that caused objections. After two years of work, State and Justice developed a new bill and a section-by-section analysis that were submitted to Congress on October 31, 1975.[4] Congress made some adjustments, but accepted both the basic structure of the bill and the specific language proposed by the Executive for Section 1605(a)(3). I reviewed that language during the first Nixon Administration when, as described in Part II below, I was deeply involved in U.S. expropriation policy, and I edited this particular provision in 1974 when we prepared a new bill for Congress. For the reasons described in this Report and Opinion, the Executive drafted the second prong of Section 1605(a)(3) to facilitate jurisdiction over a foreign government responsible for an uncompensated expropriation.
During the Iran Hostage Crisis (1979-81), I helped the Justice Department and the White House manage hundreds of cases brought against Iran and its agencies in U.S. courts under the FSIA and was the principal draftsman of the Claims Settlement Agreement with Iran published on January 19, 1981 in the form of a Declaration by the Government of Algeria.[5]
My experience with the FSIA continued after I returned to private practice in May 1981. Once the FSIA became law, many improvements were suggested. In response, the ABA Section of International Law and Practice created a committee on Foreign Sovereign Immunity with a mandate to develop a new bill. As Chairman of that Committee in 1986-88, I helped draft several amendments to the Act. The measures sponsored by the ABA were introduced in Congress in 1986, and I testified in support of those bills.[6] Important amendments relating to arbitration and act of state were enacted in 1988,[7] but other proposed improvements were not adopted. I also have represented private clients with expropriation claims against foreign states, including Kalamazoo Spice Extraction Co. in its litigation with Ethiopia where the Court relied on the second prong of Section 1605(a)(3) to sustain its jurisdiction over the foreign state.[8]
Based on this experience with the FSIA, I have published a number of articles describing the drafters' intent,[9] reviewing judicial treatment of the Act,[10] describing the ABA proposed amendments[11] and analyzing the amendments enacted in 1988.[12] In April 2011, I commented briefly on the question presented here in an ABA panel discussion.[13]
Part I. Statutory Structure and Text
The United States was the first nation to codify the law of foreign sovereign immunity by statute. The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 had three broad objectives: (1) to transfer responsibility for immunity determinations from the Department of State to the judiciary; (2) to define and codify the "restrictive" theory of immunity, which generally allows immunity for purely governmental acts but not for commercial acts by the foreign state or its agencies; and (3) to provide a comprehensive, uniform regime for litigation against foreign states and governmental agencies, including such matters as jurisdiction, immunity, service of process, pre-judgment attachment and execution of judgment.
The initiative for this legislation came from the Executive Branch to minimize foreign policy problems resulting from State Department determination of foreign requests for immunity and to meet private sector concerns that the existing system failed to afford due process and was subject to undue diplomatic pressures. The statutory text was drafted mainly by State and Justice Department attorneys, and the section-by-section analysis submitted by the Executive was adopted in large part in the congressional committee reports.
In addition to laying down the rules of immunity as such, the Act generally requires that the acts which are the basis of a claim have a territorial nexus with the United States and creates a form of long-arm statute establishing jurisdiction over claims that meet the criteria. This linkage is structured as follows: Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1330 (a) provides broadly for original jurisdiction of claims "with respect to which the foreign state is not entitled to immunity." Section 1604 of the Act, provides, in part, "a foreign state shall be immune from the jurisdiction of the courts … except as provided" in Section 1605 (a) and other named sections.[14] Section 1605 (a) states that "a foreign state shall not be immune from the jurisdiction of the courts … in any case"[15] meeting the criteria set out in the subparagraphs that follow. Those criteria define both the types of actions as to which immunity does not attach and the territorial nexus required for adjudication in U.S. courts.
The expropriation exception to immunity, Section 1605 (a) (3) of the Act, reads as follows:
A foreign state shall not be immune from the jurisdiction of courts of the United States or of the States in any case— (3) in which rights in property taken in violation of international law are in issue and that property or any property exchanged for such property is present in the United States in connection with a commercial activity carried on in the United States by the foreign state; or that property or any property exchanged for such property is owned or operated by an agency or instrumentality of the foreign state and that agency or instrumentality is engaged in a commercial activity in the United States.[16]
A "foreign state" is defined in Section 1603 (a):
"For purposes of this chapter – A 'foreign state', except as used in section 1608 of this title, includes a political subdivision of a foreign state or an agency or instrumentality of a foreign state as defined in subsection b."[17]
Under the plain language of the statute, the courts have jurisdiction over claims against a foreign state alleging the taking of property in violation of international law whenever that property or property exchanged for it is (1) "present in the United States in connection with a commercial activity carried on in the United States by the foreign state; or" (2) "that property or any property exchanged for such property is owned by an agency or instrumentality of the foreign state and that agency or instrumentality is engaged in a commercial activity in the United States." (emphasis added)
Further, this is the only reasonable reading of the text. The FSIA is a jurisdictional statute; it does not purport to change the substantive law of liability.[18] Expropriation is a sovereign act, and sovereignty is vested in the foreign state. The foreign state is responsible internationally for any expropriation carried out by its authorities, including any agency or instrumentality, and it is the primary defendant in any expropriation case. An agency or instrumentality may be liable for the state's action in certain circumstances, but such liability is not created by the FSIA.[19]
The expropriation exception is predicated on foreign state liability for takings in violation of international law and aims to define the circumstances in which a foreign government responsible for such an act should be subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. courts. The text of 1605(a)(3) reflects the balance struck by the Executive drafters and adopted by Congress. As demonstrated in Part II below, foreign expropriation of U.S. investment was a major foreign policy concern for the U.S. government in the 1960s and 70s. There were numerous uncompensated expropriations in Cuba, Latin America and other developing countries, and the State Department faced strong political pressure for coercive diplomacy to protect American interests as well as Congressional legislation restricting foreign aid.[20]
At the time, few developing countries accepted impartial dispute settlement of investment disputes, so there was a strong national interest in providing a domestic judicial remedy for victims of foreign expropriation. However, State and Justice recognized that expropriation is a governmental act and that foreign governments would likely oppose U.S. jurisdiction in such cases. While the international law of sovereign immunity was far from developed, there was concern that a broad exception for suits based on foreign takings in violation of international law might be challenged in the international community.
The drafters at State and Justice found a solution by limiting jurisdiction under the expropriation exception to two situations involving commercial activities and territorial connections with the United States that they believed would meet any objections based on emerging international law principles relating to jurisdiction and immunity. The first prong of section 1603(a) is exceedingly narrow. A foreign state that chooses to bring expropriated property into the United States for commercial purposes invites litigation of its title to that property including judicial review of the foreign taking under applicable principles of international law. The problem is that, standing alone, this provision would be of little value as few foreign governments would take that chance.
The second prong deals with another situation of great concern to U.S. policy makers. Foreign states who expropriate foreign investments, particularly those in natural resources such as petroleum and mining, often transfer those properties to governmental agencies or state enterprises who use them in world commerce, including the United States. To counter this practice, as an element of U.S. expropriation policy, the second prong of Section 1605 (a) (3) was drafted to allow claims against a foreign state when a government agency or instrumentality that owns or operates property taken in violation of international law is engaged in a commercial activity in the United States. The foreign state is the primary defendant in this situation because it authorized the uncompensated expropriation, directly or indirectly, and placed or maintained the seized assets in the hands of an agency or instrumentality that engages in commercial activity in the United States. U.S. policy makers did not want a foreign state to profit from its confiscation of U.S. investment in this way.
Venezuela's Arguments
Citing a State Department position adopted 28 years after enactment of the FSIA,[21] Venezuela would have the Court rewrite the statute to deny jurisdiction over a foreign state that has taken property in violation of international law where the state has transferred the property to a government agency or instrumentality and that agency is engaged in commercial activity in the United States. Three reasons are offered to support this construction:
(1) Supposedly, the FSIA merely codified the international law of immunity as it existed in 1976, and Congress allowed a broader remedy for expropriation against a government agency than against the foreign state responsible for the expropriation. As discussed above, section 1605(a)(3) does take a careful approach to jurisdiction in expropriation cases, but it was not intended to adopt a remedy that could rarely, if ever, be invoked. The second prong itself is narrow, but it adds teeth to U.S. jurisdiction over the foreign state. The drafters hoped that the risk of litigation in U.S. courts would deter some foreign expropriations in violation of international law.
Venezuela cites Section 1602,[22] which notes that commercial activities and commercial assets of foreign states are not immune under international law, but this text does not support Venezuela's argument. It makes no distinction between jurisdiction over foreign agencies and foreign states, and surely does not imply that jurisdiction over a foreign state under the expropriation exception conflicts with international law. To the contrary, Section 1602 makes clear that henceforth foreign states' claims to immunity shall be decided by the courts "in conformity with the principles set forth in this chapter."[23] As noted by the Supreme Court in Samantar v. Yousuf, [24]
"After the enactment of the FSIA, the Act—and not the pre-existing common law—indisputably governs the determination of whether a foreign state is entitled to sovereign immunity."[25]
While the broad principle of sovereign immunity is rooted in international practice, many details were still emerging in 1976. The United States was the first state to legislate in this area, and Congress established rules consistent with the U.S. view of international law. As noted in the House Report:
"Although the general concept of sovereign immunity appears to be recognized in international law, its specific content and application has been left to the courts of individual nations."[26]
For purposes of the Act, a "public act" immune from jurisdiction is "an act not within the exceptions in sections 1605-1607."[27]
The drafters took account of potential international law constraints by linking jurisdiction to specified commercial contacts with the United States. As one of the drafters, I was persuaded in 1976, and I am convinced now, that the exercise of jurisdiction over a foreign state under the second prong of section 1605(a)(3) does not contravene any established norm of international law. In any event, the courts are bound by the judgment of Congress. The balance struck in the expropriation exception to immunity embodies the foreign policy of the United States as agreed by the political branches and made statutory law in 1976. The text is explicit, and Congressional intent is clear.
(2) Venezuela argues that limiting jurisdiction over a foreign state in expropriation cases would be consistent with the more protective treatment given to the assets of foreign states as regards attachment and execution of judgment. Congress, on the recommendation of the Executive, did make a sharp distinction between the foreign state and an agency or instrumentality of the state regarding execution; it provided greater protection to state assets as such and less to assets of a separate agency or instrumentality.[28] This distinction reflects the judgment of the Executive that seizure of state assets is more sensitive from a foreign relations standpoint than adjudicating a claim.
The Act also provides differential treatment for agencies and instrumentalities regarding service of process[29] and punitive damages.[30] All this shows is that Congress knew how to distinguish between a foreign state as defined in Section 1603(a) and an agency or instrumentality of a foreign state as defined in 1603(b) when it wanted to do so; in those instances, it took pains to make differential treatment explicit. Congress made no such distinction in any jurisdictional provision under Section 1605. Venezuela asks the Court to override Congress's judgment on this point.
(3) Finally, Venezuela asserts that granting jurisdiction over the foreign state under prong 2 would strip all of the state's agencies and instrumentalities of immunity under the Act. That assertion is plainly incorrect; it is a straw man. Jurisdiction over a foreign state by itself never grants jurisdiction over a separate agency or instrumentality, as defined in Section 1603(b). Further, the FSIA does not address questions of substantive law, including the liability of a foreign state for the acts of one of its agencies or the liability of an agency for an act by the state. Section 1606 stipulates: " … the foreign state shall be liable in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances."[31] As noted in the House Report, the Act is not "intended to affect . . . the attribution of responsibility between or among entities of a foreign state; for example, whether the proper entity of a foreign state has been sued, or whether an entity sued is liable in whole or in part for the claimed wrong."[32] Finally, the legislative history of the FSIA makes clear that the Act respects the separate juridical identities of the state and its different agencies or instrumentalities: "Section 1610(b) will not permit execution against the property of one agency or instrumentality to satisfy a judgment against another, unrelated agency or instrumentality."[33]
In Bancec, the Supreme Court held that U.S. courts will respect the separate legal status of foreign government entities unless (a) the entity is so extensively controlled by the state that it functions as an agent of the state; or (b) to do so would work fraud or injustice. However, applying equitable principles common to international and federal common law, the Court concluded in Bancec:
"Cuba cannot escape liability for acts in violation of international law simply by retransferring the assets to separate juridical entities. To hold otherwise would permit governments to avoid the requirements of international law simply by creating juridical entities whenever the need arises." [34]
Congress drafted the second prong of the expropriation exception with just that concern in mind. If a state expropriates (or empowers an agency or instrumentality to) expropriate property in violation of international law and transfers the property to (or maintains it under control of) a state agency or instrumentality engaged in commercial activity in the United States, the state can expect to be held accountable for the expropriation in U.S. courts. In these circumstances, neither the foreign state nor the State Department has a proper complaint.
Garb v. Republic of Poland[35]
As noted in Plaintiff's response to Venezuela's motion to dismiss, judicial decisions before and after Garb have sustained jurisdiction over the foreign state under the second prong of section 1605(a)(3).[36] Despite some language to the contrary, Garb is not on point; the second prong could not have applied in that case as no separate agency or instrumentality was involved. The Treasury Ministry was part of the government itself, so jurisdiction had to be founded on the first prong of the expropriation exception. Nonetheless, citing U.S. government views submitted in Garb,[37] Venezuela argues that the State Department has "authoritatively" rejected the application of the second prong as a basis for jurisdiction over a foreign state.
I would make two comments on this contention: First, as explained in Part II below, this position, taken twenty eight years after the FSIA was enacted, is not consistent with the views of the Executive Branch and the Congress who drafted the Act in 1976. (There was little doubt that the second prong applied to Ethiopia when I briefed this issue in the Kalamazoo Spice case in 1984.[38] I was in close touch with the State Department concerning that matter. The United States filed an amicus brief in the Sixth Circuit in that case supporting the treaty exception to the act of state doctrine[39] and approving adjudication of compensation claims in U.S. courts.[40] The Sixth Circuit agreed, noting: "Obviously, the Executive branch feels that an adjudication in this matter is appropriate." [41] Subsequently, the State Department settled the dispute as part of a broader claims agreement between the United States and Ethiopia.[42])
Second, courts do not defer to Executive views on the interpretation of statutes as "authoritative." Interpretation of statutes is a judicial function. Among other prominent examples, the Supreme Court rejected the government's construction of the FSIA in Republic of Austria v Altmann,[43] of the Alien Tort Statute in Sosa,[44] and of both the Uniform Code of Military Justice[45] and the Geneva Conventions[46] in Hamdan.[47] It is particularly hard to argue that State Department views on immunity are authoritative when one of the main goals of the FSIA was precisely to transfer immunity determinations to the courts so they would not be distorted by diplomatic considerations, as happened in Garb.[48]
In Altmann, the Court ruled that claims may be brought under the FSIA arising out of Nazi confiscations decades before the FSIA was enacted. The State Department opposed retroactive application of the FSIA and was deeply concerned by the result fearing that such litigation would cause serious foreign relations problems. Garb was one of the sensitive cases in the pipeline at the time, and it was remanded by the Supreme Court for reconsideration in the light of the Court's disposition in Altmann. This context may help explain why the Department took such an extraordinarily narrow view of the jurisdiction afforded victims of expropriation by Section 1605(a)(3). It also seems likely that in 2004, the officials concerned did not attach the same importance to protecting investors from uncompensated expropriation as the Executive and Congress did in 1976. Whatever the reasons, this decades-later interpretation cannot trump the intent of Congress expressed in the plain language of the Act.
Part II. Congressional Intent to Further U.S. Expropriation Policy
The Executive initiated and drafted the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976. Work on the FSIA began in the late 1960s during the Johnson Administration and continued through the Nixon and Ford Administrations until 1976. Throughout this period, foreign expropriation of American investment was a major foreign policy issue for the United States in both bilateral relations and multilateral diplomacy. The Cuban expropriations that followed the 1959 Castro revolution confiscated American investments worth billions of dollars, and major investments were seized without proper compensation in a number of countries in Latin America, Africa and around the world. Among these were Peru, Chile, Venezuela, Jamaica, Congo, Zambia, and Libya. In addition, petroleum companies came under increasing pressure in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf to transfer ownership and control to host countries. These developments hurt U.S. economic interests, precipitated litigation in U.S. courts, and caused a strong political reaction in the business community and in Congress.
The U.S. position on foreign expropriation is well established. The U.S. has long recognized the sovereign right of a foreign state under international law to take property in its territory for a legitimate public purpose and on a non-discriminatory basis provided that the state makes provision for payment of "prompt, adequate and effective" compensation.[49] In the U.S. view, a taking that does not meet these criteria violates customary international law, and the taking state is responsible for damages. For decades, the U.S. has sought to promote these principles through international agreements and to encourage amicable settlement of international investment disputes by good faith negotiations and impartial arbitration.
These principles were controversial in the 1960s and 70s. At the time, communist countries and many developing countries asserted the right to nationalize foreign investment with or without compensation as a matter of sovereign right. They rejected the application of customary international law to these actions and opposed the international standard of compensation upheld by the United States. Few of them would accept impartial settlement of investment disputes, and many Latin American governments clung to the "Calvo" doctrine[50] holding that foreign claims were the exclusive province of domestic courts.
Responding first to Cuba, Congress adopted the "Hickenlooper Amendment" in 1962 requiring the President to suspend foreign aid to any country taking American property that fails, within six months, "to take appropriate steps, which may include arbitration, to discharge its obligations under international law … including speedy compensation for such property in convertible foreign exchange, equivalent to the full value thereof, as required by international law. …"[51] Two years later, Congress enacted the "Second Hickenlooper Amendment" overruling the Supreme Court decision in Sabbatino[52] which established the federal act of state doctrine. Under this provision, "no court in the United States shall decline on ground of the federal act of state doctrine to make a determination on the merits giving effect to the principles of international law" in taking cases arising after January 1, 1959 unless the President advises the court "that application of the act of state doctrine is required in that particular case by the foreign policy interests of the United States."[53]
Expropriations multiplied, however. In May 1971, the State Department estimated that 56 cases involving American investments remained unresolved.[54] Political and bureaucratic tensions around these issues came to a boil in 1968-72 with dramatic expropriations in Peru and Chile. After Peru settled a long-standing dispute with the International Petroleum Company ("IPC"), the elected government of President Belaunde was overthrown by the Peruvian military in October 1968. One of the first acts of the new Junta, led by Col. Juan Velasco, was to repudiate the IPC agreement and to nationalize the company without compensation. Despite vigorous diplomacy, neither President Johnson nor President Nixon was able to negotiate a satisfactory solution.
With the Hickenlooper Amendment's six month deadline set to expire in April 1969, President Nixon had to decide whether to begin his Administration by publicly suspending economic assistance to Peru – an action that would have been perceived throughout Latin America and the Caribbean as coercive intervention in Peru's internal affairs. The State Department took the lead on this matter, and President Nixon appointed John C. Irwin as his personal emissary to the Velasco government. (I accompanied Ambassador Irwin to Peru and to his meeting with President Nixon on the Hickenlooper Amendment.) In the end, on the recommendation of the State Department and Ambassador Irwin, President Nixon decided not to apply the Hickenlooper Amendment formally, but to back up diplomacy with quiet economic pressure.
This decision caused a backlash from business and in Congress. In early 1970, Treasury Secretary John Connelly began an attack on State Department policy within the Administration. Pressure on State increased sharply when Salvador Allende, heading a Marxist coalition including the Communist Party, was elected President of Chile in September 1970. One of the first acts of the new regime was to nationalize Chile's large copper mines owned by American investors without providing for any meaningful compensation. Other expropriations and debt repudiation followed. The Nixon Administration, shocked by Allende's unexpected election and preoccupied with Marxism in the Hemisphere, was slow to authorize negotiations with Allende over copper.[55] Significant negotiations eventually took place, but failed to reach agreement before the Chilean military overthrew the Allende regime.[56]
On June 23, 1971, in this intense environment, National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger ordered a comprehensive review of U.S. expropriation policy by all the interested agencies.[57] After a bitter bureaucratic dispute, the White House instituted a new expropriation policy based on a presumption that the U.S. would henceforth respond to uncompensated expropriations by withholding U.S. financial assistance and voting against loans from international development banks.[58] This program was to be administered by a new inter-agency group under the President's Committee on International Economic Policy (CIEP). One responsibility of this body was to supervise and direct State's management of individual expropriation cases previously handled by State without such supervision. President Nixon issued a formal public Statement announcing the new policy on January 24, 1972.[59] In short, the State Department won the IPC battle but lost the bureaucratic war for control of U.S. expropriation policy.[60]
In March 1972, Congress doubled down on this policy, adopting the Gonzalez Amendment requiring the President to instruct U.S. representatives to the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank and the Asian Development Bank to vote against loans to foreign countries that expropriated U.S. investment without compensation unless they entered good faith negotiations "aimed at providing prompt, adequate, and effective compensation under the applicable principles of international law."[61]
In consequence, during the years the FSIA was being drafted in the Executive Branch virtually every expropriation by a developing country became a major foreign policy issue requiring the White House to balance the national interest in protecting American investors from confiscation against the substantial foreign policy costs of seeking to block loans from international financial institutions responsible to the larger international community.
During this period, the United States and other capital-exporting countries also faced serious diplomatic initiatives by developing nations in the United Nations and other forums seeking to establish a new international economic order which would give them greater advantages in world trade, more control over multi-national enterprises, and freedom to nationalize natural resources without compensation or international accountability.[62] State Department attorneys, led by Judge Stephen Schwebel,[63] worked hard to protect U.S. interests in these negotiations including the principle of state responsibility to pay just compensation for expropriated property. In the end, the United States and like-minded countries voted against such resolutions but could not prevent their adoption. U.S. relations with Latin America became so inflamed that Secretary of State Kissinger launched a New Dialogue with Latin American Foreign Ministers in 1974. In this broader context, he tried to broker a new understanding on international law standards relating to expropriation with Mexico's Foreign Minister, Emilio Rabasa. The effort failed.
Section 1605(a)(3) was originally drafted during the first Nixon Administration and was submitted to Congress in January 1973 at the height of political focus on expropriation in both political branches. Prior to the FSIA, victims of expropriation by foreign states generally did not have recourse to the U.S. courts; they had to rely on the State Department to negotiate settlement with the foreign government. The drafters, including Legal Adviser John R. Stevenson, knew they were breaking new ground, but given the threat to U.S. investors abroad, it was deemed imperative, substantively and politically, to provide a forum for expropriation claims against foreign states in the circumstances delineated in both prongs of the expropriation exception. It was hoped a judicial remedy would provide relief for some claimants and leverage for the U.S. government.
I reviewed the expropriation exception in1972 and studied it carefully in 1974-75 when I was responsible for coordinating a new bill with stakeholders in the private sector.[64] I understood both prongs of the expropriation exception to extend jurisdiction over the foreign state. There were controversies over other provisions of the Act, including limitations on attachment and execution, but I don't recall any concerns about the scope of the second prong. The business community seemed satisfied, and there were no objections in the Executive or Congress at that time.
Monroe Leigh became Legal Adviser of the State Department on January 21, 1975. As Legal Adviser, Mr. Leigh presented the FSIA bill to Congress[65] and participated directly in the final editing. I was one of his deputies at the time and have no doubt that Monroe Leigh understood the second prong of Section 1605(a)(3) to support jurisdiction over the foreign state as well as any governmental agency or instrumentality responsible for a taking in violation of international law. He would have settled for nothing less.
In private practice, Mr. Leigh represented international oil companies and acted as counsel to the Rule of Law Committee – an industry group established to promote application of international law to foreign investment and to lobby U.S. policy makers on international investment issues. Mr. Leigh had a strong personal interest in sovereign immunity law and marked influence on the FSIA. He frequently criticized State Department determinations as distorted by diplomatic influences and long advocated transfer of immunity issues to the courts.[66] Mr. Leigh took a very broad view of the international law constraints on foreign state actions adversely affecting U.S. investments. He favored adjudication of investor claims in the U.S. courts and objected to the Sabbatino[67] decision which restricted judicial review of expropriations by foreign states.[68] Mr. Leigh explicitly referred to the Second Hickenlooper amendment overturning Sabbatino as the "Rule of Law amendment."[69] Further, I remember well that Mr. Leigh advocated strict application of the First Hickenlooper Amendment in the IPC case.
In 1976, while the FSIA was pending before Congress, Legal Adviser Leigh published a personal critique of the act of state doctrine calling for adjudication of foreign expropriation claims in the U.S. courts:[70]
"If there has been a public act fully executed within the territory of the foreign State, but if the act in question is alleged to be contrary to international law, a U.S. court should make a detailed investigation and appraisal of international law sources. If the court should conclude that an applicable international legal standard exists, the act of state doctrine would give way to this standard. On the other hand, if the court finds that such an international standard does not exist, this would leave the municipal law of the foreign State as the only rule of decision in the case; the act of state doctrine would apply."[71]
This position is consistent with reading the expropriation exception to immunity according to its plain language; it does not fit with a narrow reading that subtracts jurisdiction over the foreign state from the second clause. The Legal Adviser understood that section 1605(a)(3) does not address the act of state doctrine as such. In my opinion, he wrote this article to further the litigation of international investment disputes in U.S. courts under the Act and in private litigation.
For the reasons stated above, and based on my experience as a State Department attorney deeply involved in implementing U.S. expropriation policy while the FSIA was being drafted, and as one of the principal drafters of the Act, it is my opinion that --
the exception to immunity spelled out in the second clause of Section 1605 (a) (3) applies to a foreign state, such as Venezuela, so as to afford jurisdiction over that state in circumstances where the property taken in violation of international law or any property exchanged for such property is not present in the United States, but "is owned or operated by an agency or instrumentality of the foreign state and that agency or instrumentality is engaged in a commercial activity in the United States."
Mark B. Feldman
Garvey Schubert Barer
1000 Potomac Street N.W.
Washington DC 20007-3501
[1] Redacted
[2] Deleted
[3] See, e.g., Mexico v. Hoffman, 324 U.S. 30 (1945); Ex parte Peru, 318 U.S. 578 (1948); Spacil v. Crowe, 489 F. 2d 614 (5th Cir. 1974).
[4] See Serial No. 47, Hearing on H.R. 11315, Subcom. Admin. L. and Gov. Relations, Comm. On Judiciary, 94 Cong. 2nd Sess., June 2, 1976 at p. 1.
[5] Official Documents: Settlement Of The Iran Hostage Crisis - Declaration Of The Government Of The Democratic And Popular Republic Of Algeria, 75 Am. J. Int'l L. 422 (1981).
[6] See Serial No. 14, Hearing on H.R. 1149 etc., Subcom. Admin. L. and Gov. Relations, Comm. On Judiciary, 100 Cong. 1st Sess., May 28, 1987; Serial J-100-88, Hearing on H.R. 3763, Senate Comm. On Judiciary, 100 Cong., 2d Sess., October 5, 1988.
[7] See Pub. L. No. 100-640 (Nov. 8, 1988) 102 Stat. 3969; Pub. L. No. 100-669 (Nov. 16, 1988) 102 Stat. 3969.
[8] Kalamazoo Spice Extraction Co. v. Provisional Military Government of Socialist Ethiopia, 616 F. Supp. 660 (1985); See also Kalamazoo Spice Extraction Co. v. Provisional Military Government of Socialist Ethiopia, 729 F.2d 422 (6th Cir. 1984).
[9] See Mark Feldman, The United States Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 in Perspective: A Founder's View, 35 Int'l. Comparative L. Quart. 302 (1986).
[10] See Mark Feldman, Foreign Sovereign Immunity in the United States Courts 1976-1986, 19 Vand. J. Transnat'l L. 19 (1986).
[11] Mark Feldman, Amending the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act: The ABA Position, 20 Int'l Lawyer 1289 (1986).
[12] Mark Feldman, 1988 Arbitration and Act of State Amendments to the Federal Arbitration Act and Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act: Arbitration Law Strengthened by Congress, New York L.J., November 10, 1988.
[13] See Mark Feldman, Cultural Property Litigation and the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976: The Expropriation Exception to Immunity, American Bar Association Section of International Law, Art & Cultural Heritage Law Committee Newsletter, Vol. III, Issue No. 2, pp 9-13, Summer 2011.
[14] Section 1604, 28 U.S.C. § 1604.
[15] Section 1605(a), 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a).
[16] Section 1605(a)(3), 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(3).
[17] Section 1603(a), 28 U.S.C. § 1603(a).
[18] Section 1606, 28 U.S.C. § 1606.
[19] See First National City Bank v. Banco Para El Comercio Exterior de Cuba (Bancec), 462 U.S. 611 (1983).
[20] See, e.g., the First Hickenlooper Amendment (28 U.S.C. 2370(e)(1)), requiring the president to suspend foreign aid to any county which expropriates American property and does not takes steps to compensate for the taking within 6 months, and the Gonzalez Amendment (Pub. L No. 92-246, § 21 (Mar. 10, 1972). 86 Stat. 59; Pub. L. No. 92-247, § 12 (Mar. 10, 1972), 86 Stat. 60; and, Pub. L. No. 92-245, § 18 (Mar. 10, 1972). 86 Stat. 57), requiring the President to instruct U.S. representatives to the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank and the Asian Development Bank to vote against loans to foreign countries that expropriated U.S. investments without taking steps to compensate for the expropriation.
[21] Letter Brief for Amicus Curiae the United States of America in Support of Petitioners at 1-2, 10-14, Garb v. Republic of Poland, 440 F.3d 579 (2d Cir. 2004) (No. 02-7844) (the "2004 Letter
Brief"), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 1 to Venezuela's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 42).
[22] Section 1602, 28 U.S.C. § 1602.
[23] Id.
[24] 130 S.Ct. 2278 (2010).
[25] Id. at 2285.
[26] H.R. Rep. No. 94-1487 at 14 (1976).
[27] Id. at 17.
[28] Section 1610, 28 U.S.C. § 1610.
[29] Section 1608, 28 U.S.C. § 1608.
[30] Section 1606, 28 U.S.C. § 1606.
[31] Id.
[32] H.R. Rep. No. 94-1487, supra, at 12.
[33] H.R. Rep. No. 94-1487, supra, at 29; see also Letelier v. Republic of Chile, 748 F. 2d 790 (2 Cir. 1984) (judgment against Chile may not be executed against assets of the state-owned airline).
[34] Bancec, supra, 462 U.S. at 633.
[35] 440 F.3d 579 (2d Cir.2006).
[36] See, e.g., Agudas Chasidei Chabad v. Russian Federation, 528 F.3d 934 (D.C. Cir. 2008); Siderman v. Republic of Argentina, 965 F. 2d 699 (9th Cir. 1992), cert. den. 507 U.S. 1017 (1993); De Csepel v. Republic of Hungary,808 F. Supp. 2d 113, 131 (D.D.C. 2011); Altmann v. Republic of Austria, 142 F. Supp. 2d, 1187, 1202-1205 (C.D. Cal 2001), aff'd, 317 F.3d 954 (9th Cir. 2002), aff'd on other grounds, 541 U.S. 677 (2004); Kalamazoo Spice Extraction Co., supra, 616 F. Supp. 660.
[37] Letter Brief for Amicus Curiae the United States of America, supra, n. 18.
[38] Kalamazoo Spice Extraction Co., supra, 616 F. Supp. 660.
[39] Brief for Amicus Curiae the United States of America in Support of Petitioner at 4-6, Kalamazoo Spice Extraction Co. v. Provisional Military Government of Socialist Ethiopia, 729 F.2d 422 (6th Cir. 1984) (No. 82-1521).
[40] Id.,n. 5 at 9.
[41] Kalamazoo Spice Extraction Co., supra, 729 F. 2d at 427.
[42] See Compensation Agreement Between the Government of the United States and the Provisional Military Government of Socialist Ethiopia, T.I.A.S. No. 11193.
[43] 541 U.S. 677, 701 (2004). "The issue now before us, to which the Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae is addressed, concerns interpretation of the FSIA's reach–a 'pure question of statutory construction well within the province of the Judiciary.' While the United States' views on such an issue are of considerable interest to the Court, they merit no special deference." (internal citations omitted).
[44] Sosa v Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692 (2004).
[45] 10 U. S. C. § 801 et seq.
[46] Geneva Convention (III) Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Aug. 12, 1949, [1955] 6 U. S. T. 3316, T. I. A. S. No. 3364 (Third Geneva Convention).
[47] Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006).
[48] H.Rep. 94-1487, supra, at 7.
[49] See, e.g. Note from Secretary of State Hull to the Foreign Minister of Mexico, August 22, 1938, 3 Hackworth, Digest of International Law 658-59 (1942).
[50] See, e.g. 1976 Dig. U.S. Prac. Int'l L. 435 (1976).
[51] 28 U.S.C. 2370(e)(1).
[52] Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino, 376 U.S. 398 (1964).
[53] 28 U.S.C. 2370(e)(2).
[54] Memorandum to President Nixon from Acting Secretary John Irwin, May 8, 1971; U.S. Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States (F.R.U.S.): Nixon-Ford Administrations, Volume IV, Foreign Assistance, International Development, Trade Policies, 1969-1972, Doc. 153.
[55] Ambassador Edward Korry wanted to negotiate compensation issues with Allende even before his inauguration and brought me to Santiago in October 1970 to assist in that effort. The mission was cancelled by the White House after one day.
[56] I participated in secret meetings with senior Chilean officials in 1972.
[57] National Security Study Memorandum 131, June 23, 1971; F.R.U.S., supra, Doc. 155.
[58] National Security Decision Memorandum 136, October 8, 1971; F.R.U.S., supra, Doc. 169.
[59] Statement Announcing United States Policy on Economic Assistance and Investment Security in Developing Nations, January 19, 1972. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=3385.
[60] See generally, Jessica Einhorn, Expropriation Politics (Lexington Books 1974).
[61] See Inter-American Development Bank Act, Pub. L No. 92-246, § 21 (Mar. 10, 1972). 86 Stat. 59; International Development Association Act, Pub. L. No. 92-247, § 12 (Mar. 10, 1972), 86 Stat. 60; and Asian Development Bank Act, Pub. L. No. 92-245, § 18 (Mar. 10, 1972). 86 Stat. 57.
[62] See, e.g., UN General Assembly, Permanent Sovereignty Over Natural Resources, 17 December 1973, A/RES/3171; UN General Assembly, Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order, 1 May 1974, A/RES/3201; UN General Assembly, Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States, 6 November 1974, A/RES/3281.
[63] Then Deputy Legal Adviser, later President of the International Court of Justice.
[64] We made one technical change deleting "political subdivision" from the second prong.
[65] See Testimony of Monroe Leigh, Legal Adviser, Department of State, Serial No. 47, Hearing on H.R. 11315, Subcom. Admin. L. and Gov. Relations, Comm. On Judiciary, 94 Cong. 2nd Sess., June 2, 1976 at 24-29.
[66] See, e.g., Monroe Leigh & Timothy Atkeson, Due Process in the Emerging Foreign Relations Law of the United States- Part II, 22 Business Lawyer 3, 22, 27 (November 1966); Monroe Leigh, New Departures in the Law of Sovereign Immunity, 63 Am Soc'y Int'l Law Proc. 182, 187 (1969).
[67] Banco Nacional de Cuba, supra, 376 U.S. 398.
[68] "The present author has been a critic of the Supreme Court decision in Sabbatino from the beginning." Monroe Leigh, Sabbatino's Silver Anniversary and the Restatement, No Cause for Celebration, 24 Int'l Lawyer 1, 4 (1990); Monroe Leigh & Timothy Atkeson, Due Process in the Emerging Foreign Relations Law of the United States- Part I, 21 Business Lawyer 853 (July 1966).
[69] Id.at 868.
[70] Monroe Leigh and Michael David Sandler, Dunhill: Toward a Reconsideration of Sabbatino, 16 Va. J. Int. L. 685 (1976).
[71] Id.at 717.


text:
Regardless if you're celebrating a traditional Valentine's Day or serving yourself a hearty bowl of self-love this February, here are 35 unique ideas for putting yourself first regardless of your relationship status. Love the body and space you're currently in without making any excuses!
Image by Mats Meyer Illustrations
1 // GET ILLUSTRATED Celebrate your body or your fierce fashion sense with a professional illustration. Get dolled up and commemorate your sensuality with a sophisticated and gorgeous illustration of your silhouette that you'd be proud to feature anywhere in your home. Keep them guessing as guests wonder if that's really you. I recently commissioned a Valentine piece with Mats Meyer Illustrations for my husband. It's as much for him, as it is for me. I'm game to place in our entrance for all to see. I've never felt so mischievous!
- 2 // BOOK A BOUDOIR SESSION Capture your sensuality and celebrate your body in its current form with a boudoir session just for you! Boudoir sessions are so liberating and you don't need a special occasion to set one up…but Valentine's Day sure is a great motivator! Aside from it being a personal piece of art, here are 4 Reasons Every Woman Should Do A Boudoir Session.
- 3 // BOOK YOURSELF OUT FOR THE WEEKEND Zone out for the weekend via a 3-day getaway or simply hit that trusty "do not disturb" button on your phone. A weekend (especially three solid days worth) will feel like you traveled overseas for a week without the need for a passport. Here are ideas for 12 Splurge-Worthy Getaway ideas in California…the ideal state for a three day weekend!
- 4 // COZY UP IN A B+B Find a charming Bed and Breakfast in your home state or in a neighboring city and treat yourself to some R+R. Regardless if you're booking a stay for one, two or the entire family, being away and having breakfast in bed or in a cheery morning room will make you feel like your worlds away from Monday. Here is a listing of the best B+B's around the US.
- 5 // TAKE YOURSELF ON A DATE It may sound cliche, but we often feel like we need an excuse to treat ourselves. Put your big girl pants on and take yourself to dinner and a movie. Here's a fun read on 4 Reasons Why You Should Date Yourself Before Anyone Else Does. Regardless if your romantically linked or not, self-dates mirror self-acceptance and are a great way to show self-love.
- 6 // SAY HELLO TO YOUR THIRD EYE Think about implementing this powerful mediation technique with calming, meditation music by the Nu Meditation Music Channel. If you've ever wondered how to harness the full potential of your intuition then read 4 Proven Strategies For Awakening The Third Eye or try these apps for meditation on the go.
- 7 // STITCH AND BITCH Although this list is all about creating zen moments, sometimes you just need a good cleansing of the soul via a bitch fest in a completely different forum…with a fresh pair of ears. Whether you're looking to learn a new hobby, make new friends, or just unwind on your own—learning to stitch can be a practical way to cleanse and reflect. Check out knitting clubs in your area or make it a personal practice of peace by viewing this segment on how to knit on YouTube.
- 8 // CHANGE UP YOUR CUT+COLOR Let Valentine's Weekend motivate you to get a fresh cut and color you'll love just in time for spring. This sea of gorgeous pin-worthy hair colors will have you rushing to the salon.
- 9 // PIN HOME DECOR IDEAS Thinking about a re-model or re-decorating your apartment? Use Valentine's Weekend to create positivity and admiration for current living space. Use Pinterest to aid in the designing of a new space that celebrates the essence of you and a fresh outlook for the new year! These pins are full of clever and beautiful ideas.
- 10 // START JOURNALING Allow for positive reflection and creative freehand with daily journaling. Promote love and gratitude with the Bloom, Lovely Journal to give yourself license to feel beautiful and reflect on the unique aspects that make you feel special. Make sure you get a journal (like this one) that provides daily quotes to prompt and aid in everyday journaling.
- 11 // MEET WITH A COMPLIMENTARY STYLIST Chances are your favorite clothing store offers free styling sessions with a trained stylist. The stylist can put together looks that you might not have considered or make you fall in love with a body part you've under appreciated lately. See yourself through the eyes of a trained stylist like those at Anthropologie and Nordstrom.
- 12 // GET A FEW GARMENTS TAILORED Love your body as it is and tailor your clothes to hug those curves! Compromise no longer and get your favorite pieces tailored this weekend to show your body some love and appreciation for all it does. Here's a piece on why tailoring is the best kept secret of well-dressed women!
- 13 // CURATE YOUR COFFEE I fell in love with this recipe at first glance. Place frozen almond milk cubes (a neat trick is to freeze almond milk into ice cubes the night before so it doesn't water down your coffee) into a clear coffee mug. Next, drizzle in some caramel and then pour in your favorite ice coffee beverage. Top off your drink with more almond milk for tasty treat that also looks Insta-worthy! Check out a slew of fun and tasty coffee recipes by visiting this YouTube link.
- 14 // GET COZY WITH CARBS For a cozy love fest at home, try this super easy and enticing pasta sauce recipe by Damsel In Dior. With just three ingredients: A big can of peeled tomatoes, one large yellow onion and some butta, you can celebrate some self-love with some warm pasta.
- 15 // DESIGN AN ACCENT WALL Get a fresh start on the year with a new accent wall by adding a pop of color or designing your own picture gallery. You know you've been wanting to get to this task for a while…so get started! Once you get in the groove, painting can be very soothing and allows for moments of clarity. Check out tips on how to create a great gallery wall here.
- 16// BOOK THAT MASSAGE Stop making excuses for not getting a luxurious massage. Treat yourself to a spa day or simply book a spa treat that feeds your soul. Check out Spa Finder for sweetheart specials of all kinds. For a budget-friendly spa day, try this all-natural diy spa day at home.
Image by Mats Meyer Illustrations
- 17 // TAKE AN ART CLASS Visit a local studio or pop-up venue with a loved one, neighbor or on your own to get acquainted with your inner artist. Check out fun events and women's nights at studios like Bottle and Bottega.
- 18 // JOIN A SUPPORTIVE WOMAN'S GROUP Take action through education by checking out groups on LiveYourDream.org or diverse support groups designed for women at Diversity Best Practices.
- 19 // GET A FREE WORKOUT ONLINE Get acquainted with a new, invigorating workout regime online. Scroll through YouTube for one that suits your workout style, or browse through The Body Book's free array of suggested routines like this motivating video on getting a full body workout during commercials.
- 20 // RESTOCK YOUR PANTRY Start the weekend on the right foot by implementing healthy snacks and staples into your diet. Begin an early spring clean to remove processed foods from your pantry or simply go for healthier options that are always at the ready with this quick Guide To Stocking Your Pantry.
21 // MAKE PICTURE BOOKS Get those memories off your phone and on to a pretty, visual scrap book. From Shutterfly to ZNO, have fun with a picture project this Valentine's Weekend. No more excuses!
- 22 // CAPTURE MEMORY VIDEOS ON YOUR PHONE As a mom, I either manage to record the end of something fantastic my kids said or did, or simply just live in the moment (hoping I'll remember everything later)! The OneDay APP instant movie maker let's you record moments in real time while still living in the moment! Create and capture your own memories this Valentine's Day.
- 23 // GO BRA AND PANTY SHOPPING FOR YOURSELF You should be the one loving your undies the most and seriously…who couldn't use a fresh, new bra? Treat the girls to some new hardware for Valentine's whether shopping online or in store. Getting measured for the right bra size can change your life!
- 24 // SIGN UP FOR A SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE Eyeing a new subscription service lately? Why not give it a go in time for a V-day delivery. You'll feel like you're getting a pre-screened box of surprises that's way better than chocolate. Check out an array of subscriptions and reviews at Hello Subscription.
- 25 // JOIN A WINE CLUB Just like #24, join a wine club to get your first delivery on Valentine's Day. Talk about the perfect gift! Check out wine clubs like California Wine Club or Amazon Wine to get started just in time.
- 26 // VOLUNTEER Volunteering can certainly help to enrich the lives of others and our own. Seek out a charity close to your heart or donate your time to a cause you believe in. VolunteerMatch.org brings good people and good causes together. Find a nonprofit in your area to meet diverse, like-mind individuals who wish to improve lives in your community.
- 27 // GO WINE TASTING You don't have to live near Napa to go wine tasting. All American Wineries features wineries and vineyards in your area to make any weekend a fruitful and delicious escape. Hop to it and share your favorite find with us!
- 28 // BE A TOURIST IN YOUR OWN CITY Spend the day in your local downtown visiting museums, or plan a staycation in your favorite hotel. Get a great feel for the amazing museums in your area by visiting GreatMuseums.org (you may even find some you never new existed).
- 29 // BINGE TO YOUR HEART'S CONTENT Make it a marathon with Netflix, Amazon or Comcast by catching up with your favorite show or begin a new series like Z: The Beginning of Everything on Amazon Prime.
- 30 // CATCH UP WITH A GIRLFRIEND Celebrate Galentine's Day with a girlfriend (regardless of her relationship status). Valentine's Day is meant for remembering all those you love. Here are 21 Ways to Celebrate Galentine's Day With Your BFFs.
- 31 // GO TO A FARMER'S MARKET Feel rewarded visiting your local farmer's market for fresh veggies, juicy fruits and city faves. Get a complete list of the local markets in your area by visiting the USDA Farmers Market Directory.
- 32 // CLEAN OUT YOUR CLOSET It may seem like a lot of work, but cleaning out your closet can be quite invigorating. Consider creating your own capsule wardrobe or finally donate those clothes you never wear. Also, there's always great pleasure in completing a task without interruption. Carving out some solid alone time to clean out your closet can feel like a present on its own.
- 33 // TREAT YOURSELF TO AFTERNOON TEA You really don't need a special occasion to treat yourself to an afternoon tea—especially one that makes you feel like you're a world away! Make a reservation at a tea house near you, or seek out a luxurious hotel in your downtown as they probably have a tea experience as fabulous as the Palm Court in Chicago.
- 34 // TAKE THAT ONLINE CLASS Websites like Creative Live and SkillShare will help you learn a new trade or help you take your brand to the next level. From practical courses to more technical training, you can begin to master a subject over the V-Day weekend and feel all sorts of productive!
- 35 // COZY UP WITH A PODCAST Curl up V-day weekend with a riveting Podcast series on almost any subject you can think of. From inspiring business topics on Girl Boss Radio, to smart conversations about food and wellness with One Part Podcast or That's So Retrograde, to a podcast about the big questions and hard choices often left out of polite conversations with Death, Sex & Money. Unwind, zone out and get more in depth with a favorite subject! (see also
How will you be showing some self love this Valentine's Day? Share in your comments below!
Triple Chocolate Superfood Truffles
14 Sweet Gift Finds for Valentine's Day
Cameron Diaz on Unconditional Self-Love
Download | Feel-Good Valentine's Day Cards
MARITZA BUELVAS is a published beauty and lifestyle style writer. She enjoys producing national content for blogs, media and brands. You can find her portfolio at www.beautyforbloggers.com. Connect with Maritza: Instagram // Twitter // Email
Image by Mats Meyer Illustrations