text:
This video, aimed at students aged 16+, opens with Professor Chris Budd holding the plastic yellow duck he is entering in the Annual Bath Plastic Duck Race. Competition is stiff - there are over 3,000 contestants - but how can we predict who will win? Very few competitors have form, and it's hard to tell much about their training regimens... so is the outcome totally unpredictable?
Many popular books about mathematics combine elements of exposition and personal commentary, but few combine these disparate elements to the same extent as this book.
Not many books about maths have chapters that start "The dead man seemed to stare at me in a most disconcerting way." But maybe more should - this book is a highly entertaining read, crossing sound mathematical exposition with the classic Sherlock Holmes style of investigation.
Ballet and mathematics - not a combination that you often come across, but one that works beautifully in Frederick Ashton's 1948 ballet, Scénes de ballet. From the geometric patterns on the men's tunics and the perpendicular angle of the ballerina's tutu, to the movements and positioning of the dancers themselves, this ballet is a celebration of mathematics. Ashton was inspired by mathematics, and, according to the programme notes, used a system of Euclidean geometry to choreograph the piece.
Gerd Gigerenzer is not a mathematician or statistician per se, but primarily a psychologist, working across disciplines to understand how human beings make decisions in the face of uncertainty. What he offers here is nothing less than a prescription for how to think, how to choose, and how to live, when the information on which we base our decisions is necessarily incomplete and flawed. For example - how worried should you be if you have a positive mammogram as part of a screening programme for breast cancer, or a positive HIV test despite the fact that you are in a low-risk group?
Paul Erdös is reported to have said "A mathematician is a machine for turning coffee into theorems". We may never know if he appreciated the mathematics behind the perfect dunk of a biscuit into said coffee, but we can all begin to understand the ubiquity of maths in our lives, thanks to Len Fisher's delightful book. The subtitle is "The science of everyday life", though pretty much all the content is maths with the equations (mostly) taken out. Perhaps Professor Fisher was advised that sales would suffer if they weren't, but anyone interested in the applications of mathematics to the real world will find plenty to amuse and educate.
One of Oxford University Press's series of "Short Introductions", this book is a rigorous and challenging description, by one of the greatest pure mathematicians alive (Timothy Gowers is Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge, and a Fields Medal recipient), of what mathematics is. Perhaps too challenging, in fact - on page 23 we are introduced to an axiomatisation of number systems, and things only get tougher. Clearly, as one of a highly intellectual series, the book is intended to stretch its readers' abilities to the utmost.
Since the phenomenal success of "The little book of calm", publishers have been falling over themselves to produce "little books" of everything else, presumably in the hope that the essential ingredient was the littleness, rather than the calmness. Although, at 5 inches by 7¼, "1089 and all that" makes a rather big little book, and its content couldn't be further from the banalities of "The little book of calm", there is something of a "little book of mathematics" about it, with its short chapters and personal narrative.


text: Ever since Verizon came out with the 5.0 OS series, I've got the problem of volume on my hands free in my car at 50%. I've tried various cods but still no fix. I understand a lot of people have this same issue on 5.0 OS. Does anyone know what a fix might be and is BB working on fixing this issue?

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Is a Bad Hair Day Bad for Your Health?
When your mane's a mess, does it seem like nothing goes your way? Don't worry – it's not just you.
Whether you're fighting with frizz, trying to pump up limp locks, or doing battle with the weather, having a hair meltdown may affect more than just your appearance. "Bad hair" can have profound effects on your mental well-being, causing both women and men to lose self-esteem, become more socially insecure, and even doubt their own abilities, researchers at Yale University found in one study.
The study, commissioned by Proctor and Gamble, found that people may actually perform below their abilities when they believe their hair is not up to snuff. The researchers reported that even the thought of a bad hair day made women and men believe they weren't as smart as others. Socially, women reported feeling embarrassed, ashamed, and self-conscious during bad hair days while men said they felt more nervous and less self-confident.
"There is a strong correlation between what we see in the mirror and how we feel about ourselves," says Amy L. Flowers, PhD, a psychologist with expertise in self-esteem and body image and with a practice in Macon, Ga. "Thomas Cash, a famous researcher in body image, states that up to 25 percent of our self-esteem is determined by how we feel about our bodies — you can't hate the way you look and still love yourself," Flowers says. "Also, we assume that others see us the way we see ourselves, so if we don't like a particular feature (like our hair), we assume that others find it repulsive, too." But, of course, that's not always the case.
Hair Care, Mood, and Well-Being
Thankfully, most women report being generally happy with the results of their hair care routine. A 2010 survey conducted by ShopSmart, a magazine from the publishers of Consumer Reports, found that 19 percent of respondents said they "love" their hair and 41 percent said they "like" it.
But 44 percent of respondents said their mood has been negatively affected by a bad hair day, and 26 percent said they actually were moved to tears after a botched haircut. The reaction is understandable, says Flowers. "We put importance on our hair and face because these are features that cannot be hidden; they are the first things we notice about people." U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton can attest to the power of hair. She once famously quipped, "If I want to knock a story off the front page, I just change my hairstyle."
To avoid a bad hair day, women are ready to dip pretty deep into their pockets. The ShopSmart poll found that, on average, women pay $39 dollars for a haircut. Also, 53 percent of women reported regularly coloring their hair. If it's done at a salon, women shell out an average $65 for color.
"I think women will spend their last money on manicures and haircuts because these are not seen as luxuries any more but 'impression-formation devices,' especially on job interviews, first dates, etc.," Flowers says.
What Good Hair Care Says About You
"I think hair can say a lot about how we see ourselves — if it looks like you just fell out of bed, it implies that you don't care about your appearance, which to me indicates poor self-esteem," says Flowers. "I don't think you have to have on a full face of makeup before going out to get the mail, but a person who is going out in public should be clean and tidy. It shows self-respect and makes a good impression." And she urges people to "remember that old expression: You only have one chance to make a first impression."
TELL US: Does a bad hair day dampen your emotional health? Share your experiences in the comments. (Note: Mobile users won't be able to comment.)


text:
- Font:
- +
- -
Guests: Kerry Sanders, Samantha Guthrie, Muhammad Musri, John Feehery, Steve McMahon
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Keeping up with the Joneses. Let's play
MATTHEWS: Good evening. I'm Chris Matthews in Washington.
Leading off: dead deal. Pastor Terry Jones says that he was lied to, that he had a promise by backers of that New York mosque that they would move the site. He said he feels that he was tricked and yes, lied to—after the New York imam said he would not let anyone toy with his religion.
Well, the evening's strange turns of truth began two hours ago when Pastor Jones, standing next to a local imam, said he wouldn't burn any Korans this Saturday because he had a deal with the people backing that mosque two blocks from the New York World Trade Centers not to build.
PASTOR TERRY JONES, DOVE WORLD OUTREACH CENTER: The imam has agreed to move the mosque. We have agreed to cancel our event on Saturday. And on Saturday, I will be flying up there to meet with him.
MATTHEWS: And then Imam Feisal Rauf, the backer of the New York mosque, issued this statement, quote, "I am glad that Pastor Jones has decided not to burn any Korans. However, I have not spoken to Pastor Jones or to Imam Musri. I am surprised by their announcement. We are not going to toy with our religion or any other, nor are we going to barter."
Then the imam who stood beside Pastor Jones confirmed no deal had been reached.
Well, we've got this story covered from all the angles. Kerry Sanders has been covering the story from Gainesville, Florida, the site of the event today, for NBC News.
Lawrence O'Donnell is host of "THE LAST WORD," by the way, a great phrase for tonight's development. You need a last word tonight. It will be on at 10:00 which will debut later this month here on MSNBC.
And Savannah Guthrie covers the White House for NBC News and she's the co-host of the great show, "THE DAILY RUNDOWN" here on MSNBC.
Kerry Sanders, you're very close to the action here, how do you read the fact that this pastor standing next to a local imam said they had a deal, within an hour, it's clear they were wrong?
KERRY SANDERS, NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: It appears to me that the pastor did not dot his I's and crossed his T's based on what he came out and said, because it was very clear early on at that initial press conference that Muhammad Musri, the imam from central Florida who was meeting with Pastor Jones, did not say that we have spoken directly to and Pastor Jones says he was never there when a phone call was made. As you stated, he said that he feels he's been tricked, he's been lied to, he's been hoodwinked.
But it was very clear from the first moments of that discussion, especially when Imam Muhammad Musri from central Florida began to speak, that they were speaking a different language here. And then, of course, when we asked the Pastor Jones, OK, so you're not going to burn the Korans here on Saturday, you're going to go to New York—who are you meeting with, what time, where? He didn't have any of those answers.
It may also be: this is his way to bow out. Maybe this is how he can say there was confusion and he bows out. Needless to say, the pressure has been intense.
NBC News has confirmed that there was a phone call today from Secretary of Defense Gates to the pastor. That was at around 4:00. And about an hour later is when he came out and made that announcement—with all the world's eyes on this field in rural Florida waiting to find out if and when he was going to announce that he was backing down—Chris.
MATTHEWS: Well, here's the latest word from Pastor Jones after his initial statement—apparently after hearing in the news that there is no deal with that New York imam. Let's listen to Pastor Jones on his latest statement of what's going on.
JONES: That the imam would move the mosque from Ground Zero. I was told he cannot move it tomorrow. I said that is fine. But it cannot be in 10 years. These are the exact words that I said. The man said that is fine.
I said, now, he has agreed to move the mosque away from the Ground Zero area. Yes, he has. That is what I was told.
Do I feel tricked? Yes, of course. I don't feel tricked. I was lied to. Of course, that's why—that's why at this time, I am not prepared to believe that. I am not prepared to make that accusation. I want to just wait and see and I'm right now, I am believing his word. I find it very hard to believe that he would lie to me.
MATTHEWS: Well, that's a hard thing to put together. We're used to dealing in objective facts try to get them. Here, how do you get the facts from a guy here, Pastor Jones, who won't even say who this man is who he talked to? Who is this man who may have lied or tricked him?
SANDERS: Well, I take it was the imam from central Florida, Muhammad Musri. He was meeting with. I think that's who he was talking about.
But I asked him, you know, like who were you on the phone with? No names. It's—look, doesn't it fit in many ways the way much of this has played out in terms of I had a very long interview with Pastor Jones and tried to get to some very specifics with him about why he wanted to burn the Koran, what specifically was in the Koran that was most offensive to him. And he hadn't even read the Koran. He basically admitted maybe he had looked at a page but primary what he said was there's no mention of Jesus Christ in the Koran as the savior.
Well, anybody who understands religions understands that would not be in there in the same way it's not in the Torah, in the Jewish religion. And I asked him, are you going to start burning the Torah? And he said no.
So, a lot of this has been very confusing in terms of his—
SANDERS: -- approach to all of this, why he said he was doing this and, of course, now maybe his confusion continues.
MATTHEWS: One last question. When did you first hear him mention the mosque in New York as part of a deal or part of his concerns? I asked—I had two of those fellows on this week and they never brought it up.
SANDERS: He never has talked about it in the time that I've been here that that had anything to do with this. I asked him again out here, I said where did this New York mosque become part of your reason to burn the Korans here? And he said, well, I sent out an e-mail three weeks ago, I'm surprised you didn't get it.
So, I don't know. It's the first we've heard of it.
MATTHEWS: OK. Kerry Sanders, thanks for that great reporting on a murky story down there in Gainesville, Florida. Sir, thank you for joining us.
I want to work my way down the clock here.
Lawrence, it seems like you were on to this. You were on to it instinctively. You smelled trouble here. You smelled a rat. It took awhile for the pastor to know that he was in a confused state here at least, maybe.
But what I'm going to hang on here is this decision to tie it to the mosque. There seems oftentimes in this battle with the Middle East, that everybody comes up with something. It's always the motive that they think will sell that moment.
You've got bin Laden who, all of a sudden, has an interest in Middle East peace talks. He never had an interest in the Middle East. He may be mad at his father for what he did to him in terms of selling out their country or whatever, but nothing to do with the Middle East, because that he knows that he can play that number.
Here he will is playing with that very touchy question in the United States, the mosque. I wonder whether he listened to Boehner today, listened to Palin today, and they pushed the idea of this twinning up of these two difficult stories.
LAWRENCE O'DONNELL, HOST, "THE LAST WORD": Well, you know, he's not a very good thinker on his own about these things. And so, he had plenty of time—plenty of time to find his way to that community center near Ground Zero over the last, you know, week or so. And he didn't get there until John Boehner and Sarah Palin laid out the road map for him.
Here's how to link this, you know, to what's going on in New York. And so, then, in his wild imaginings, you know, he came up with the idea that you know, he just made a deal.
Now, look, when I heard him say that live on this network that he just made a deal with the imam in New York. I knew—I had read the imam's op-ed piece in the "New York Times"—I knew as the words were coming out of his mouth, this was a lie from a charlatan that had not happened. You could not have read that "New York Times" op-ed piece by the imam and think he was going to make a deal with the most ridiculous person are to step up to a microphone on this subject. It was obviously impossible from second one.
MATTHEWS: Well, you've got a talent for that, for figuring out people's character flaws and B.S. factors. Good reading on the B.S. factor there.
Let's go right now to Savannah Guthrie.
Savannah, let's go to the official part of this story. Secretary Gates, that decision by the administration perhaps—was there any coordination in the last week among the top people who have spoken on this starting with Petraeus, the great General Petraeus? When he put out the word that this was endangering our troops, burning the Koran on international television, that had a big development in the story. And then—and then now, of course, Secretary Gates calling.
Have they been coordinating with the president?
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE, NBC NEWS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, today, certainly. I mean, with the White House anyway. Senior level officials talking with Secretary Gates and deciding to go forward this afternoon with Secretary Gates placing a call to this pastor about 4:00. There certainly was consultation between the White House and the Pentagon on that and a decision made that the Pentagon, Secretary Gates should take the lead because this is where the administration's best argument was lying, saying that, look, the troops are in danger if you go forward with this burning of the Koran.
As to the issue of General Petraeus, you know, I just got off the
phone with a senior government official and asked, do you think in any way
that Petraeus helped escalate or elevate this story by weighing in on it
and saying earlier this week, look, if this guy in Florida goes forward
with this it's going to endanger troops lives? At that moment, it kind of
it lit a match to the story. And this official says, well, wait a minute, Petraeus was asked this question. There already were stories out there, and we really feel it was important to make it clear this really is a serious concern about the troops who are in harm's way, who are in these very dangerous neighborhoods interfacing with people very closely. There were very concerned about it.
So, Secretary Gates today, after they heard this pastor say, "Nobody from the White House has called me, no one from State, no one from Pentagon," I think a lot of folks here thought, is this somebody looking for a way out, looking for a lifeline. And if this was the way to get him to stop, they felt, well, making the call was worth it.
MATTHEWS: Yes. Let's go to Lawrence on that.
Here's a great question of intuition, perhaps we're going to know as we find out. My favorite question, maybe it's yours, and Samantha who's in the room when a decision is made? Who do you bring in? Who's on your life line?
In this case, had he two forces coming at him. One, the secretary of defense who's a nonpartisan public official, a holdover from the Bush administration—top drawer guy in every way in terms of serving our country, and probably the key to the whole chain of command in terms of our security in this country. He calls up at 4:00. By 5:00, this guy has magically cut a deal with the imam in New York through a third party imam who he doesn't seem to trust now and is accusing him of lying to him and/or tricking him.
So, which was the most important phone call, the one through Imam Musri or the direct call from officials channels from the defense secretary?
O'DONNELL: And/or the visit he got from the FBI this morning. Look -
MATTHEWS: What do you think that was about? Would you think that was a spooky warning that we have—we're checking into something about you or what? Do you think there might be a goose there?
O'DONNELL: Well, it theoretically was about them presenting to him up what they think is evidence that there would be some kind of violent retaliation to his act. And so, they don't do this because it could be inciteful. That would be the legitimate trip to make. The FBI should not be going in there and saying, you know, we're going to start looking at you if you do this and they shouldn't be threatening people because of their possible exercises of the First Amendment.
But, you know, the guy who came up to that microphone when we were first on the air, Chris, was a guy trying to get out of this. And he was making up a story to get himself out of this. He had painted himself into this corner and he was making up a story to get himself out of it. And that's all I saw.
Now, what the next stage of his story is, I don't know. I think the big strategic problem here is we've now demonstrated that all you have to do to get all of the networks in front of your house with a camera and get the secretary of defense to call you and get the president to talk about it, even get Hillary Clinton to talk about you and get foreign leaders to talk about you is simply say, "I'm going to burn a Koran."
This is now a "South Park" episode already. You know, I'm going to burn a Koran the world goes crazy around you. And you threaten for as long as you possibly. And then at the end of the "South Park" episode, you burn the Koran or you don't. You probably don't.
O'DONNELL: You know, this is where we are.
MATTHEWS: One fly in that ointment, the man is armed, so is his partner Pastor Sapp. They are worried personally. They wouldn't be armed if they weren't. They know that they may not be out of the woods in terms of personal safety.
This is not as easy as an episode in a televised program. I think he maybe right 90 percent, but if I were the reverend, I'd probably stay concerned about the situation that the FBI warned him of today.
Thank you, Lawrence O'Donnell. It's great having you. Stay on for a second here. Good luck with your fabulous new show "THE LAST WORD."
O'DONNELL: Thanks, Chris.
MATTHEWS: Tonight's a good example of how these stories do tend to develop throughout the evening.
Well, and, Savannah, you're the greatest. Thanks. The show is called "THE RUNDOWN" every morning. It's a great way to find out what's going on in the world I love, politics.
We'll have much more on the pastor's plan to call off his burning of the Koran when we come back.
This is HARDBALL, on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: We're back.
We've got some good news tonight. The pastor down in Florida says he's calling off his decision to burn the Koran this coming Saturday to commemorate, if you will, the 9/11 tragedy. He says he has a deal with the imam in New York to move that proposed mosque site near Ground Zero, away from Ground Zero. But the imam in New York says there is no deal.
Let's go back now to Gainesville, Florida, the scene of all this, to Imam Muhammad Musri of the Islamic center in central Florida.
Imam, sir, thank you so much for joining us.
I don't know how this developed. Give me a sense of how everything could get so confused in a matter of an hour and a half.
IMAM MUHAMMAD MUSRI, ISLAMIC CENTER OF CENTRAL FLORIDA: Thank you, Chris, for having me.
I believe that there's slight confusion as to what was agreed inside the church and what the pastor mentioned once the press conference took place. What I mentioned before going in as well as to the pastor inside that we only have a commitment for a meeting with Imam Abdul Rauf in New York and that meeting is for me and Pastor Jones and Imam Abdul Rauf to discuss that relocation. But it's conditioned on Pastor Jones canceling his planned event here on Saturday.
MATTHEWS: When you were standing next to Pastor Jones and heard him say there was a deal to move the Islamic center further away from the World Trade Center, what did you feel? Why didn't you interrupt him and say that's not the deal we have?
MUSRI: I did not—he emphasized that his understanding is the deal with me that I—because I stand for moving that project away from Ground Zero to a more ideal location, I told him my commitment to him. I was very clear to him and I reiterated that when I spoke in my part of the speech.
MATTHEWS: But it doesn't seem like there was confusion. It sounds like you say you told him there was a meeting scheduled. And he's saying there was a deal made. You're saying different things. It doesn't sound like confusion. It sounds like have you different versions of what happened.
MUSRI: Yes, he feels that if this deal, once we go to New York and meet with Imam Abdul Rauf and if this deal happens now or a week from now or a month, a year, in his words, if it takes 10 years to reach that deal, that is OK with him.
MATTHEWS: I see. So, it's faith-based?
MUSRI: Yes.
MATTHEWS: He's had faith—he has faith, in other words, that a deal will be struck. He doesn't have a deal, but he has faith that a deal will be struck?
MUSRI: Precisely. And he said, I have nothing written on paper, but I have the word of this imam, referring to me, that we will go together to secure that deal from New York. But he and I are very clear that it is not in our hands. It is solely the decision of Imam Abdul Rauf and his team in New York.
MATTHEWS: Do you believe—knowing your own religious colleagues and confers and your own religious commitment—do you believe that the imam in New York, Imam Rauf, will make a decision to move the mosque or rather the Islamic center under this kind of pressure, which looks like blackmail, religious blackmail, threatening to commit a sacrilege in order to get something to do something you want them to do? It sounds like religious extortion to me.
MUSRI: I hope that the imam does not treat it that way. I myself feel there is plenty of room within our faith to compromise on a physical location for a mosque, but without compromising on the principle of establishing a center where people of different faiths could come together and work on peace-building and work on bringing peace into our world.
MATTHEWS: Well, you know in my religion, Roman Catholicism, we study ethical questions in school all the time. Do you see any ethical problem in getting someone to do something by threatening to burn the holy book of the Koran? To use that as a way to get somebody to do something—is that morally OK for you?
MUSRI: It is not OK. It's morally wrong for a religious person of any creed to use such extortion to try to force the hand of other people to give up their rights. However, I feel that Pastor Jones here needed to come out a winner of this—
MATTHEWS: I see.
MUSRI: -- dilemma that he was in.
MATTHEWS: So, you gave him an escape route?
MUSRI: I gave him the hope and the possibility of achieving something measurable that he can claim as a win, but that is a promise to work on it, not a sign and sealed and delivered promise.
MATTHEWS: OK. You strike me as a very honest man, sir. Thank you so much for clearing this up.
The Reverend Terry Jones believes that somehow he can achieve through faith and hard work a compromise to move that mosque, that Islamic center down the road, maybe over 10 years but there's no deal to automatically do it.
Thank you so much, Imam Muhammad Musri, for clearing it up for us.
MUSRI: Thanks.
MATTHEWS: We'll have much more on the decision by Pastor Terry Jones to cancel his Koran-burning. I do think it was extortion and how the Obama administration played a part in this perhaps through the call from Secretary Gates at 4:00 this afternoon Eastern. It seemed to have triggered this had action, this look for a way out—and the way out was this promise of a meeting in New York. No more.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
JONES: We are, of course, now against any other group burning Korans, obviously. We have accomplished our goal. We have accomplished what we feel God wants us to do. We would right now ask no one to burn Korans. We are very, very strong on that. As strong as we were that we should burn Korans. This is now not the time to do it.
MATTHEWS: I was for burning Korans before I was against it. That's Pastor Terry Jones after his initial statement.
Democratic strategist Steve McMahon joins us, along with Republican strategist John Feehery.
Thanks, John, for joining us. John, your thoughts about this.
I have been very concerned that the pastor is not the most original sort of person. He heard some things during the day that gave him license. He said wait a minute, there's a connection to the mosque. I've heard Boehner talked about it. I've heard Sarah Palin talked about it—both twinning together these two issues, pairing them up, if you will, as morally equivalent.
And, all of a sudden, he says, well, wait a minute, they move the mosque, I won't burn the Koran.
I don't think this guy won the Iowa Creative Writing Award. I think he got this idea from somebody else. Your thoughts.
JOHN FEEHERY, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Chris, I think that the idea of giving the Pastor Jones this kind of platform is actually quite stunning to me. I think that this is—this guy who has a congregation of about 30 seems to be having over-influence on our international foreign policy and our domestic policy. And it really just puzzles me to no end.
MATTHEWS: If you were General Petraeus, would you have not issued this statement that said this guy is a danger to our troops? If you were al-Maliki, the prime minister of Iraq, would you have said this is going to cause an East/West problem, a big one, a big damage? Would you have not said what those men said?
FEEHERY: I think that the best thing to do is what they do sometimes when the Taliban takes a hostage and that is, don't say a word. Don't make this a bigger deal than it needs to be. Have a conspiracy of silence with the media and don't give this story any oxygen.
And I hope that we learn this lesson from this guy. I mean, to give this—this kind of guy this kind of platform in our democracy is really stunning.
MATTHEWS: Well, when they put—let me go over to Steve—when they put our you travelers around the world on alert, when the word goes out, it's not safe to travel over this issue, when you have our troops, the leader of our troops, the most respected military man in the country, over there saying it's a danger to troops, these are realities. I don't think you can ignore them in the news.
MATTHEWS: And I've watched this guy. I had Pastor Jones on and his colleague, Pastor Sapp. We've tried to negotiate with them or not negotiate—trying to find out who would tell them to shut up.
STEVE MCMAHON, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Yes. I mean, he's basically a 65-year-old version of an underwear bomber. But you're absolutely right about the larger point, which is: there was no—there was not going to be a conspiracy between the media—
MATTHEWS: We don't regularly meet with Roger Ailes and decide which stories to croak.
MCMAHON: Exactly. And he was out there—it was a newsworthy story and was made more newsworthy by what Malaki and what Petraeus said over the weekend.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
MCMAHON: And so, it required a I response from the president. When he's sitting there with George Stephanopoulos, asked the question that you knew was going to be asked. He wasn't there to talk about the Koran, he was there to talk about his speech in Cleveland yesterday. But George Stephanopoulos, being a good journalist, asked the question. The president answered it and pretty soon the race was on.
That's why the FBI was there today, I'm sure. It's why Secretary Gates made the call because once the president starts to apply that kind of pressure, you don't want the president not to be successful.
MATTHEWS: It's a good point you raise, though, you know, John. And I want to get you further on this. In a world that's almost like—to use an old reference—an old pinball machine where you put one ball in the machine and all the lights go on and all the bells ring, it's very hard to say I'm not going to pay attention to that pinball. It's going around making the lights go on. You can say, oh, my light won't go on, but other things will.
And when this thing bops around the Islamic world, that there's a Christian minister of any sort is threatening to burn their holy book, these—well, we know how sensitive the Islamic world is to the West. They feel that they have been abused by the West. They have been exploited for their oil. We sided with Israel. They have a lot of grievances against us. And adding insult to injury is not something they would have ignored if we'd stayed quiet about it. I don't think. Your thoughts?
FEEHERY: Well, I understand the point. I also understand why Gates -
and I think Gates made the right decision to call because, obviously, it worked. I think that's why Jones decided not to burn the Koran. But—
MATTHEWS: So you think that 4:00 call did—was something that we should have done?
FEEHERY: I think eventually—I think he had no choice. I think when Geoff Morrell went out and said, hey, guys, this is coming, this is why we're doing it—I think he had to do that, too.
MATTHEWS: Who's Geoff Morrell? Who's Geoff Morrell?
FEEHERY: He's the spokesman for the DOD.
FEEHERY: And I would say that—he's a good guy, by the way—and I
would say that, but from a lesson that we can all learn here is that we
cannot have our foreign policy so impacted by someone who has a
congregation of 30 who is going to do something crazy, because if we do
that, we are in big trouble as a nation if we're so fragile. And we can't
from a media standpoint, if we go to every crazy story out there, there is some responsibility here from the media, that they have to, I think, learn from this lesson and not make this guy, this Terry Jones, the media star that he's become.
MCMAHON: But, John, this became like Abu Ghraib. I mean, it became symbolic of something that was festering in the Muslim and Islamic world for a long time and will continue to fester. And so, it became symbolic of something much bigger than somebody who was perhaps a little less than imaginative and had a very small congregation.
He went out there. The media gave him attention. Things built. Petraeus and others helped contribute to that. And it's not a—it's not something that's not predictable here that when all those things converge, you're going to have this kind of coverage.
And thank goodness that it got walked back because I happen to believe it could have been something that impacted a truce and it could have been something that impacted our relationships.
MATTHEWS: Well, let me go back to John on this. We saw in Denmark where a cartoonist could cause a stir. We saw a movie producer—movie director killed over there over a film. We see how the Islamic world is so sensitive that they will track down someone anywhere in the world who causes a sacrilege toward their religion and very sensitive about it.
FEEHERY: You know, Chris—
MATTHEWS: You have to live with that sensitivity. You can say, we're not going to pay attention to that sensitivity, but darn it, if they are sensitive, you've got to know about it.
FEEHERY: Well, I appreciate that. And I also—the person who actually said—made the most sense on this was Mayor Bloomberg who said, you know, I don't—I don't agree with this. I think it's stupid and idiotic. But—and once I defend Jones' right to do it.
And I think that that's the larger lesson here is that, you know, that there are going to be sometimes when people are going to say things that are negative towards Islam, and, you know, the Islamic world can't go crazy every time that happens. I mean, you know, that's the other part of this, that we have to be very careful how we react to these things so we don't overemphasize that.
MATTHEWS: I know. I agree. You know, I guess we're going to have to decide in this country that we can't keep somebody has a right to do something because it sounds like you're saying they have a rightfulness to do it, that there's somehow a moral claim they're making simply because it's legal.
The Nazis—the American Nazis to march through Skokie, a Jewish neighborhood in Illinois. They have a right, I guess. But the fact of—
MATTHEWS: -- rightfulness. You know that neighborhood.
FEEHERY: And, Chris, I would say that's kind of like you don't have the right to yell "fire" in a—in a movie theater.
MATTHEWS: I think this was close to that by the way. I think it's close to that.
FEEHERY: It might be.
MATTHEWS: Because if we know that travelers are being warned, our troops are being warned on their behalf, that there's a real threat level, there's rocks being thrown at our people over there already in Kabul, on the notion this is going to happen, we know that there's an incitement factor here. I think I could argue, I'm not an attorney but I think I could go into court and say, this is as close—this is as close to really yelling fire as you can think of because all logic tells us people will die because of this burning.
MCMAHON: You know what? It's—I actually am an attorney. I try not to play one in on television. It is—it is as close to fire in a theater because of the danger. It poses immediate threat to the troops. It's very, very far away from the mosque in New York City, which is what the Republicans are trying to do here. And I think it's a very sinister.
FEEHERY: No, I don't think that's right, Steve.
MCMAHON: Well, no, but hold on a second. Hold on a second. Just one second, John. Because Boehner did the sort of equivalency and Sarah Palin has done the equivalency. It was their suggestion that perhaps he not do this if the imam in New York City agrees not to build the mosque. And so, they were the ones who link it first as far as I know—and as far as any news organization knows. And I think—
MATTHEWS: Let him respond.
MATTHEWS: John, you think it's unfair to show that they played, I think, an accessory role here?
FEEHERY: I think it's unfair. I also—if you talk to Boehner directly, I guarantee you that he was not making that more equivalence. I think that what he was saying this morning on "Good Morning America" was that, you know, you have a right to burn these Korans, you have the right to have this mosque here -- 75 percent of the American people are against building the mosque near the 9/11; 99.9 percent of the American people or more are against burning the Koran.
MATTHEWS: I think the idea of moral equivalence here is ridiculous.
Thank you.
People want to build a mosque, it's been argued about it, right or wrong. Somebody who wants to burn the Koran—there's only one reason to do it and it's a bad one.
Thank you, Steve McMahon.
FEEHERY: I agree with that.
MATTHEWS: Thank you—I think we all agree on that. Thank you.
Sarah Palin doesn't agree with us on that.
Thank you, Steve McMahon. She thinks it's equal.
Thank you Feehery, a good guy, a good Republican.
MCMAHON: A fine Irishman.
MATTHEWS: Well, I'll see that's probably why you're a good guy.
Back with more on Pastor Jones in Florida who apparently canceled his Koran-burning event on the promise, I think it was the faith that the mosque center near Ground Zero will be moved at some point in the next 10 years. It was faith-based, it turns out. We heard that from the imam. So, maybe this is getting clear of what happened. I think he was overstating his claim when he spoke to the press at 5:00.
The New York mosque says it has no plans to move and it won't negotiate. We'll get the latest from New York when we return.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: We're back.
Pastor Terry Jones of Florida has canceled his plan to burn Korans this Saturday. He did so on the faith that that proposed mosque two blocks from New York's Ground Zero would be moved.
New York, Mike Taibbi is with us now with us from outside the proposed mosque.
Mike, thanks so much. We've been working this story. I think we got somewhere. Imam Musri said, he was the guy standing next to Terry Jones, Reverend Terry Jones—
MIKE TAIBBI, NEW YORKER: Yes.
MATTHEWS: -- he said that basically the reverend was talking about faith, that sometime during the course of talks with the people building the World Trade Center mosque, that maybe they'll change their mind over perhaps 10 years. Your news on that subject.
TAIBBI: Well, it's kind of sugar-coating it a little bit. I mean, Pastor Jones said unequivocally, we have a deal. This is going to happen. I'm going to go to New York.
And apparently, that didn't happen. He later said he wasn't tricked, he was lied to.
But, you know, Chris, if for whatever reason Pastor Jones has now made a permanent decision that he's not going to have a bonfire of Korans on Saturdays that situation in Gainesville, Florida, and the images it would have created is defused. However, that doesn't defuse the situation here because even though there's not a equivalency between the two events, burning Korans deliberately and building an Islamic center mosque and 2 ½ blocks from Ground Zero, both those events percolated in the same media universe. They were trumped up and they became huge international stories. This one remains a story like that.
We spoke on the way down here as the story we're developing before, Chris, with the organizers of the two competing rallies and protests that are scheduled for Saturday, 9/11, the ninth anniversary of the solemn and horrible event in American history. Both of them seemed eager to cancel their protests, their demonstrations if there was a deal. But if there wasn't a deal, the protests go on.
Now, one of them is organized by people who are organized against bigotry—anti-Muslim bigotry and racism. They expect to have thousands of people here after 3:00 on Saturday.
The other one is organized by Pamela Geller, you know who she is. She owns the "Atlas Shrugs" Web site—
MATTHEWS: Wow.
TAIBBI: -- which is a provocative, too mild the word for what is. But she's the one who frame this story for the way it's now seen by thousands and thousands of people and a plurality in this country as an Islamist victory mega-mosque on Ground Zero. It's not on Ground Zero. It's not established with the stated purpose of being a triumphal or victory mosque. It's in fact, a cultural center that would have rooms to accommodate all religions, et cetera, et cetera, according to Imam Rauf, who's organized it himself.
The protests will continue. This story continues and is not defused yet—no matter what happens in Gainesville, Florida.
MATTHEWS: Well, here's a big problem. Suppose the word goes around the world that the reason this guy is not burning the holy book of Islam is because there was a secret deal cut to kill the mosque.
TAIBBI: They're all—they're all bad stories but we've learned, as this new media has developed into the entity that it is, Chris, that it doesn't take much. Don't forget, it was two-thirds of a second of Senator George Allen using the word "macaca" on cell phone video that ended the presidential aspirations of a legitimate candidate. I mean, it doesn't take much this day and age, a couple of cartoons, daily cartoons.
MATTHEWS: Mike, do you see what—Mike, do you see just what went behind you? Another one of these people.
We're watching the Terry Jones story down in Florida. That's crazy enough or dangerous enough. And we got the truther guy walking past him in the past to try to exploit a kooky story with a kookier story. And now we have you with some Jesus is going to bring down whatever justice on somebody there using an excuse of you talking to a camera.
TAIBBI: Yes, well, they've been—they've been passing by here all day long. They've been doing it all week long. There's even a guy who had a painting, actually, a pretty effective painting of somebody pouring salt in the wound. That's the theme, I think, of the protesters—those people who are objecting to the cultural center and the mosque.
MATTHEWS: So, what do we expect on Saturday, right now to finish up this segment what do we expect is going to come of this diffusion?
TAIBBI: You know, I think it could be ugly. I mean, I've listened to what Pam Geller has said. This is the woman who owns this blog, I don't know if you read it, I have.
This is woman who had the mock-up of Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan in a Nazi uniform. This is a woman has—she attacks Obama every day, says that his mother was involved in pornography, et cetera, et cetera. All of these crazy things and yet, she's invited on to newscasts as an expert on something—on the cultural center and mosque to talk about it.
It could be very ugly. The signs have been ugly here. A lot of ugly things have been said leading up to this. Who knows what's going to happen on Saturday? But I don't think it's going to be just a story about the memorial for 9/11.
MATTHEWS: Yes. I think the next Tom Wolfe novel.
Anyway, we have new word from down in Florida, the associate pastor, Wayne Sapp, p who was on this program a couple of days ago, says the Koran-burning event is not canceled, but only temporarily suspended until they can confirm the meeting with the New York imam. So, we'll continue to watch this story as it develops.
Mike, what do you make of that? Now, we have the possibility they're not going to meet. I think they'll meet at least. And if they don't meet, they're going to go burn the Korans again.
TAIBBI: I think you're right. I think it's an astounding story and the equivalency of the bonfire of the vanities is true. It can be one minor, isolated event that just metastasizes into something huge and unstoppable. If they put this back on, the Koran-burning back on, who knows what will happen? Those images getting out there, we know will have consequences.
MATTHEWS: I think you're thinking hard on this. Thanks so much, Mike Taibbi up in New York.
When we return, we're going to talk politics and whether it's smart strategy for President Obama to go after House Republican Leader John Boehner by name. All of a sudden, after two years of ignoring the opposition, a Chicago strategy by pretending there is no Republican Party, he's now let him off free and now, he's decided it's time to stop letting him off free, going after Boehner, going after Mitch McConnell.
Is it smart to target your enemy so personally?
HARDBALL back in a minute.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.
Well, President Obama had one name on his mind in Ohio yesterday, did you catch it? Let's listen.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Mr. Boehner and the Republicans in Congress said no to these projects. Mr. Boehner has so far said no to infrastructure. So, let me be clear to Mr. Boehner and everybody else: we should not hold middle class tax cuts hostage any longer. When these same Republicans, including Mr. Boehner were in charge, the number of earmarks and pet projects went up, not down.
MATTHEWS: Was this a smart strategy for the president and his party?
Let's bring in "Salon's" Steve Kornacki and "Politico's" Josh Gerstein.
Thank you.
Steve, first and then, Josh.
Steve, is this smart to give a name to his pain?
STEVE KORNACKI, SALON: Sure. I mean, at this point, you know, I'm not sure that there's really that much that the Democrats and Obama can do to really kind of salvage this election. But I think if you look at one of their sort of fundamental missions for the next few months is really to fire up the Democratic base. If you can—if you can increase the Democratic turnout from where it's sort of projected to be right now, there's a chance they could maybe survive in some of these marginal districts where otherwise they lose.
And if you make this a fight between, you know, Barack Obama on one hand and John Boehner on the other hand, between Barack Obama and what he's tried to do, and between the Republicans and what they have actually done for the last two years, which is to say no, I think that's a message that resonates from the Democratic base.
And I think—yes, I'm sure it upsets Republicans to hear it, but, you know, the reality is, Republicans are the most motivated, you know, segment of the electorate right now. So, you can't really make them any more motivated to go out and vote against you. Maybe you can—you know, you can get some more excitement going on the Democratic side. So, at this point, they have nothing left to lose I think.
MATTHEWS: Well, I just wonder how you can excite anybody with the name John Boehner, Josh. I mean, he is the dullest. Dan Aykroyd could play him, I think, on an off night.
Josh, I don't see the excitement factor in bringing in John Boehner as your bad guy. He's a dull golfer. He looks like he just threw down a—you know, just made a bad putt on the golf course. He doesn't look too happy. But he doesn't like the enemy of the people to me. Your thoughts.
JOSH GERSTEIN, POLITICO: Well, I agree, Chris. I think what the White House is trying to do is really that they've come a long way from 2008 when the strategy was all about hope and they're trying to make it about fear, about fearing the Republicans and what the Republicans are going to do. I'm sure that Boehner is sort of the perfect boogie man. I mean, for one thing—
MATTHEWS: Well, why not go after the whack jobs, or the whackier people, I should say, like Michele Bachmann or Sharron Angle, all those tea partiers out there that are far more colorful as bad guys?
GERSTEIN: Well, I think, then, the president would just be accused of highlighting people that are clearly on the fringe of the party. And part of this message is supposed to be that somehow John Boehner could be the speaker if this election doesn't go well.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
GERSTEIN: I don't it was an accident when White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs weeks ago, you remember, he got pilloried for saying the House might fall into Republican hands. I think we were seeing the beginning of this strategy of trying to scare people about what could happen in November since the White House has given up on giving people any hope that they can fix the problem.
MATTHEWS: Well, here's what we know, Steve and Josh. We know the strategy has leaked out what they're up to. It was in "Politico" today. They—apparently, the Republicans, if they get back the speaker's gavel, they want to start defunding or starving the health care plan that Barack Obama passed historically this year, in other words, make it not happen by taking money away from the program.
Two, taking away all the stimulus money they get their hands on and basically yielding it back somewhere else.
And third, beginning massive probes on every front of everything that might embarrass this administration.
That seems like a fairly negative program.
Your thoughts—Steve.
KORNACKI: Yes. Everything starts to look different if the Republicans do take back Congress, if they are in power next year. You know, their words, their actions take on a whole different level of meaning and significance for voters.
I mean, right now, the Republicans are just a catch-all party, you know, for everybody out there who has any doubts, any reservations and any anxiety about the direction the country is going. And there's a lot of anxiety out there right now.
But when the Republicans, if they actually control the legislative branch of government and they're the ones sending things to the president's desk, that changes the dynamic completely. And I mean, the obvious parallel, we talked about before, is to 1995, and last time you sort of had that—you know, had that setup and Republicans thought, you know, that the '94 midterms when they gained, you know, more than 50 seats in the House was this great mandate to take on Bill Clinton.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
KORNACKI: They tried to take him on the budget, and suddenly, they looked really extreme to people.
MATTHEWS: Well, you know, this whole agenda, Josh, seems pretty Debbie Downer, doesn't it?
GERSTEIN: Yes. I mean, you have this sort of dualism out there in the country, Chris. I think it's a situation where we would face even greater gridlock than we've seen over the last year and a half. And, you know, the American people, even individuals, I think, are both frustrated with gridlock and also scared about some of the things the government has done, and I think maybe the White House feels like somehow, with a Hail Mary pass here, they can break through that message by scaring people that there would be even more gridlock and just a recipe for nothing to be done on the economic front.
MATTHEWS: Well, I'm going to come back in a minute and cheer on the president. I think his strategy is about time. The Chicago strategy of ignoring the enemy only works in Chicago where there is no Republican Party. There is one in Washington.
Thank you, Steve Kornacki.
Thank you, Josh Gerstein.
When we return, I will have those thoughts about President Obama's battle plan. Be right back.
MATTHEWS: Well, let me finish with a salute to that new Obama political strategy.
For two years, the president avoided attacks on the Republicans. He had promised to stay above the pettier forms of partisan politics and he stuck to it. But there was strategy behind his approach. He never mentioned the names, at least not in an adversarial way of the Republican leaders, Senator Mitch McConnell and Congressman John Boehner.
This is the old Chicago method. You act like the Democrats are the only game in town, the only party of government, you mock the activists and other critics as trouble-makers mouthing off, you don't give Republican leaders the time of day. Well, you figure out, by not mentioning their names, you diminish their stature to the point of making them invisible.
Well, that strategy obviously didn't work. It gave coverage to the Boehners and McConnells of this world as they went about obstructing everything Obama did or tried to do. People, like Senator McConnell and Congressman Boehner, didn't take a single bit of scar tissue for their behavior, their endless efforts to kill the new president's program.
Well, all this changed yesterday. And that's a good thing. By giving a name for the public's pain, President Obama has demanded basic accountability.
Does anyone listening think Mitch McConnell deserves to be elevated to Senate majority leader, or that John Boehner deserves to be speaker of the House? What for?
By jamming the Democrats, McConnell and Boehner created a partisan seesaw. They go up simply by getting Democrats to go down. Anybody feel like rewarding that?
That's HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being with us.
"COUNTDOWN" with Keith Olbermann starts right now.
Copyright 2010 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.> PASTE THE TRANSCRIPT HERE
Copyright 2010 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>


text:
More Coverage Of The 2014 Young Hollywood Awards, DWTS Season 19 Talk, And More
Just a few more things from the 2014 Young Hollywood Awards. First, and in case you weren't able to watch them on The CW Network last night, check out Pure Derek Hough. We've added some video of Derek Hough dancing with his Move Live On Tour dancers. It's awesome. They killed that stage. Heidi added some more HQ photos too. *sigh*
Also don't miss Kristyn Burtt's interviews with Mark Ballas, Derek Hough, and Amy Purdy at the Red Carpet Closet. They talk on their summer and current projects. Mark and Derek also talk on Dancing With The Stars and if they are returning. Kristyn also has a summary of her interviews at She Knows. Here is a little take….
Ballas was asked about his inspiring new single and said it was an awesome song for all women. "I want them to feel sexy no matter what shape, race or color." The dancer-singer-songwriter added that he just wants all women to feel empowered when they hear his tune.
"All women that'll hear this song will feel sexy and confident," Ballas continued, "They'll be like 'That's my song!'"
Derek talked about the success of his sold-out tour and how happy he's been with the response. "It was amazing. I couldn't be happier with the outcome."
As far as coming back for Season 19 of DWTS, Hough joked he "may come back as a curtain." But, as there are still many challenges left to be accomplished on the dance competition series, the blond dancer may just come back for one more go.
Lastly, Glamour interviewed Mark, Derek, and Amy Purdy. Below is more for what they found out out about their projects and future on Dancing With The Stars. Be sure to read the link for more. Note the mentions on Oprah….
Here's the thing: Every season on DWTS, Derek wants to be inspired. Rightfully so. He is the choreographer of our generation. Even though Derek didn't take home Mirrorball number six last season, it was probably his most rewarding season to date, thanks to his partnership with Amy. So is there anything left? "I don't know yet," he admitted to me at the Young Hollywood Awards (airing tonight on the CW). "I have a few weeks [to decide]."
The rumor is that after a grueling tour schedule (Derek and sister Julianne finished their Move Live tour in Los Angeles on Saturday night), an upcoming book launch (Taking the Lead: Lessons From a Life in Motion), and numerous other projects, the Emmy-winning choreographer is ready for a break—or a new challenge. "I just want to be inspired," he stated quite matter-of-factly.
If there's anyone to inspire him to sign up for more Dancing, it's Oprah. In fact, Derek and Amy are finally planning their much-talked about lunch with Lady O. "I'm seeing her in two weeks," he revealed. Amy is actually going to team up with Oprah on her "Life That You Want" tour, and Derek has been invited to perform with Amy. Does all that bonding time with Oprah mean something more? Could Oprah actually join DWTS and partner up with Derek? "That would be amazing! Or we could just start up a whole new dance show on OWN and call it Own the Dance Floor!" he joked. "OK, that was awful. [Laughs]"
Meanwhile, Derek's best friend, colleague, and all-around "package deal" (his words, not mine) Mark Ballas revealed a little bit of insight into DWTS negotiations. According to Mark, the reason that none of the pro-dancers have committed yet is that none of them has actually been offered a deal. "We usually don't get the call until about five days before," he revealed. "It's usually that late, so we'll see."
Wow, Oprah doing Dancing With The Stars would be amazing, but, I doubt she'd do it. And let's hope we find out more soon on whether Mark and Derek will be back for Dancing With The Stars Season 19!! *keeping my fingers crossed*


text:
|Large Medium Small
A woman who fell in love with a snake has married the reptile at a traditional Hindu wedding celebrated by 2,000 guests in India's eastern state of Orissa. [AFP]
A woman who fell in love with a snake has married the reptile at a traditional Hindu wedding celebrated by 2,000 guests in India's Orissa state, reports said.
Bimbala Das wore a silk saree for the ceremony Wednesday at Atala village near the Orissa state capital Bhubaneswar.
Priests chanted mantras to seal the union, but the snake failed to come out of a nearby ant hill where it lives, the Press Trust of India (PTI) said on Friday.
A brass replica snake stood in for the hesitant groom.
"Though snakes cannot speak nor understand, we communicate in a peculiar way," Das, 30, told the agency.
"Whenever I put milk near the ant hill where the cobra lives, it always comes out to drink.
"I always get to see it every time I go near the ant hill. It has never harmed me," she added.
Villagers welcomed the wedding in the belief it would bring good fortune and laid on a feast for the big day.
Snakes and particularly the King Cobra are venerated in India as religious symbols worn by Lord Shiva, the god of destruction.
Das, from a lower caste, converted to the animal-loving vegetarian Vaishnav sect whose local elders gave her permission to marry the cobra, the world's largest venomous snake that can grow up to five metres.
"I am happy," said her mother Dyuti Bhoi, who has two other daughters and two sons to marry off.
"Bimbala was ill," Bhoi told local OTV channel. "We had no money to treat her. Then she started offering milk to the snake ... she was cured. That made her fall in love."
Das has moved into a hut built close to the ant hill since the wedding.
Earlier this year, a tribal girl was married off to a dog on the outskirts of Bhubaneswar.


text:
Charles Geraldi
Recently Mr. Geraldi has joined Turtle & Hughes a $240MM distributor of electrical and automation equipment as Director of Automation. His professional experiences include serving as President/Division Manager of ALSTOM USA's (formerly GEC ALSTHOM) Parvex Servo Systems Division and Vice President of Lenze Corporation. He teaches motion control to industry engineers and is currently an adjunct professor teaching a new course on Mechatronics at Stevens Institute of Technology. In addition, he has served as a member of the Board of Directors of Motion Science, Inc. a pioneer company in servo amplifiers and multi-axis position controllers for pc based and stand alone systems in California during the explosive growth of motion control in the 90's.


text:
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Access options
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Additional information
Electronic Publication
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fishbain, D.A. . Eur Spine J 11, 606 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-002-0457-z
Issue Date:


text:
Infinix Hot 3 Firmware Download.This is a stock rom for Infinix Hot 3.
You can download all Infinix Hot 3 Flash File from Blogthetech
Infinix Hot 3 Firmware Information
|Rom Name
|Infinix Hot 3 Stock Firmware Rom
|Infinix Model
|Based On
|XUI Stock OS
|Rom OS Version
|Android 5.1 Lollipop
|Rom Type
|Socs version
|Software needed
|SP Flash Tool
|Stock OS Version
|Zip format
|MTK Drivers
How to Flash Infinix Hot 3 Firmware
Infinix Hot 3 is an MT6580 phone which means you will need an SP Flash Tool to flash Infinix Hot 3 stock rom.
Why we need Infinix Hot 3 Firmware
It's always advisable to backup Infinix Hot 3 Firmware after purchasing it. You are definitely going to need it someday. You are going to need it for the following reasons.
Downgrade or Upgrade Infinix Hot 3.
You can use Infinix Hot 3 Stock rom to downgrade your smartphone or upgrade your smartphone. It depends on the release of the firmware or your choice if the option is available.
Unbrick Infinix Hot 3.
Infinix Hot 3 Stock Rom can also be used to unbrick any Infinix Hot 3. Smartphones can be bricked in the process of rooting or flashing a custom firmware or rom or recovery.
Unroot Infinix Hot 3.
You can also use Infinix Hot 3 stock firmware to completely unroot any Infinix Hot 3 smartphone. You also can regain your warranty by properly flashing the official Infinix Hot 3 stock firmware. It can be done by reverting back to the official stock firmware of Infinix Hot 3 if your smartphone has tampered.
Fix Issues on Infinix Hot 3.
Your Infinix Hot 3 might develop issue which might be unknown to it you, if it a software related issue, you can restore and fix it by flashing the stock firmware for Infinix Hot 3. Today, we are presenting all the Official Firmware, both Official releases and updates following it. You can download all of Infinix Hot 3 Firmware here. If you experience any problem with any of the files, don't hesitate to tell us.
Requirements to flash Infinix Hot 3 Firmware
- MTK Drivers.
- Vcom Drivers.
- A working detectable USB Cord.
- An SP Flash Tool Software.
- Infinix Hot 3 firmware file.
- A Windows PC.
Note that flashing a Infinix Hot 3 firmware to your phone erases everything in your phone including contents in internal storage. It is always very advisable to backup your contents to an external storage or a PC. If your phone is bricked and can't be accessed, I guess there is nothing you can do.
Follow this procedure below if you wish to flash Infinix Hot 3 Stock Rom.
Flash Infinix Hot 3 Firmware using SP Flash tool.
- Download SP Flash Tool to your PC.
- Download Infinix Hot 3 Firmware.
- Extract the software to your desired folder.
- Look for flash_tool and launch it.
- Minimise Sp Flash Tool window.
- Locate the downloaded Infinix Hot 3 stock rom.
- Extract the file from ZIP or Rar format.
- Open SP Flash Tool.
- Click on Scatter-loading.
- Locate the scatter file on the extracted Infinix Hot 3 stock rom folder.
- Select the scatter file in the directory.
- Wait for it to load the files.
- Power OFF your Infinix Hot 3.
- Click on Download.
- Connect your Infinix Hot 3 while OFF to begin Flashing.
- Done.
First of all, Please, Remember to uncheck preloader option before flashing a stock firmware or stock rom on your phone.
It always bricks some phone and you don't need that.
If you don't install all the necessary drivers, you may experience issues detecting your phone with the PC.


text:
MuLondon Skincare Giveaway!
Have you caught wind that I'm madly in l♥ve with MuLondon moisturizers? If this is news, take off your windbreaker and peep my past MuLondon reviews. If you're too lazenstein to clickity clack on the link (it's okay, I'm still in my jammies and haven't mustered up the energy to go to el baño, and I have to pee!), here's a teensie summary: This sh*t is the SH*T!
Need more deets? All of MuLondon's products are vegan, cruelty-free, organic, handmade, free of ick-nasties (e.g. mineral oils, parabens, silicones, emulsifiers, synthetics, chemicals, etc.), and everything is made in London. And duuuuude, Organic White Truffle Chocolate Moisturizer…. need I say more?! Didn't think so.
I'm SO into this stuff that I want YOU to try MuLondon, too! Three lucky VBR readers are going to each win a moisturizer of their choice (Organic Lavender, Organic Rose, Organic Marigold, Frankincense & Myrrh, Organic White Chocolate Truffle, Organic Hemp, or White Chocolate Elbow, Knee & Heel Cream). Enter the giveaway below!
About Sunny (Sunny's Profile)Longtime vegan, hardcore compassionate beauty junkie, serious cake aficionado, and lover of all things floofy and sparkly! If there's something in particular you'd like me to review, drop me a line at email@example.com. You can also find me on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, and Google +.
Filed in: giveaway • vegan skin care
Comments (169)
Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed
all natural all lovely
They all sound amazing!
Organic White Chocolate is calling my name!
The rose or hemp moisturizer look amazing! I also follow ya on Instagram.
white chocolate sounds good to me!
I would love to try the White Chocolate truffle…sounds fab
Organic Rose
The white chocolate truffle sounds good enough to eat!
Organic white chocolate truffle
the white chocolate truffle sounds great
White Chocolate Truffle sounds divine
I'm following you and mulondon on instagram @leenburke
The White Chocolate elbow, knee and heel would be ideal for me. 🙂


text:
Size: 330 ml
This is the second and penultimate beer from the Kasteel range which has found its way down my throat. The first was the dark sweet cloying beast that is the Kasteel Donker (#93), where I had previously told the story of the history of the famous castle in Ingelmunster, up until 1986 when the brewing siblings Luc and Marc Van Honsebrouck moved in.
It hasn't all been good news though since. In 2001 the beautiful moated building was devastated by a terrible fire. Work has been done ever since to restore the castle however so immense was the damage that at least two thirds are no longer open to the public. The structure does though remain, and has been bandaged up over the years to at least look better on the outside, but the heart and soul has literally been ripped out of this historic building. This is no better exemplified than by the loss of almost everything inside – family furniture, tapestries, sculptures and paintings all perished forever one September evening.
It also isn't the first time that the castle has burnt down. This jinxed building and in fact the whole village of Ingelmunster was completely razed in 1695 following hostilities between English, French and Spanish soldiers. The rebuilding which followed under Hapsburg rule has led to the current design which has only just hung onto existence by the very skin of its teeth. In fact, the only area now safe for the public to enter is the Kasteelkelder, the atmospheric name for the castle's basement. It is here where tourists and beer fans can enjoy tasting the famous Van Honsebrouck beers in their traditional castle shaped glasses.
The Kasteel Triple is another megalith of a beer. Weighing in at 11% you would need to ensure you had a designated driver if you were stopping in at Ingelmunster for a quick tipple. Somebody recently suggested to me that this beer is similar to the Bush Blonde (#164) by Dubuisson, and to be fair they aren't too far wrong in terms of appearance and potency, however I feel the Kasteel Tripel has just a little more panache in the finish. There is some fruit in there, some spice and whatever that something is that just urges you to want another. This is by no means a professional ground-breaking brew, but it deserves its place as one of the better super-strength triples.


text:
"I Learned That Courage Was Not The Absence of Fear, But The Triumph Over It. The Brave Man Is Not He Who Does Not Feel Afraid, But He Who Conquers That Fear"
Great men and women throughout history have understood courage:
I learned that courage was not the absence of fear, but the triumph over it. The brave man is not he who does not feel afraid, but he who conquers that fear."
– Nelson Mandela
Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway.
- John Wayne
Courage is doing what your afraid to do. There can be no courage unless you're scared.
- Eddie Rickenbacker
Courage is fear holding on a minute longer.
- George Patton
Courage Is Contagious
Courage is also contagious. And studies show that even a single dissenter speaking their mind empowers others to think for themselves.
Here's an example … of a navy sailor standing tall in the middle of last year's Oakland tear gas attack holding the constitution and a veterans for peace flag … moments after Scott Olsen was hit in the head.
Here he is a couple of minutes before, standing with marine veteran Scott Olsen before Olsen was hit in the head and nearly killed by a projectile:
Whether you agree with Occupy or not, you have to admire his courage.
Here's a more stunning example. This is the iconic picture of the brave protester facing down tanks in Tiananmen Square:
But this newly-surfaced image with a much wider view shows that he didn't face 4 tanks … but scores of tanks:
And watch this incredible video of the man getting in front of the tank as it tries to maneuver around him, and then climbing on top of the tank:
His courage inspired people worldwide.
Courage is contagious.
Can you understand now why tyrants are so desperate to keep images of courage away from the general public … and instead to promote fear and cowardice?
Graphic by Anthony Freda: www.AnthonyFreda.com
The Secret to Courage … Love
There is a real misunderstanding of what it means to be courageous. In America, courage is often thought of as a testosterone-driven toughness. There's nothing the matter with testosterone. Masculinity is a great thing. But many American men secretly fear that they don't have sufficient testosterone to really be brave when the chips are down. Even those of us who think of ourselves as brave men usually only act like that when we know it is within the bounds of safety, within the limits of what we can handle.
We might jump into a bar room brawl to protect our buddy, but that's because we know we're only going to get knocked around a little bit — nothing but bruises that will go away in a little while. The stakes just aren't that high.
But most American men secretly doubt whether they are macho enough to pull it off under fire. They may watch alot of action movies, and talk tough, and stand up when its not really dangerous (or when they clearly outgun the other guy), but they are secretly terrified that they don't have quite enough backbone to pull it off against the big boys, such as tyrants.
I would argue that this view fundamentally misunderstands the nature of courage, and ensures that we will never have true courage when it counts.
By way of analogy, the word "discipline" comes from "disciple". If you are a true "disciple" of an idea of a plan or a strategy or a religion, then you will stick to it and "have discipline" to reach your goal. It is not just a matter of willpower; it is also devotion to something bigger than ourselves.
Similarly, the word "courage" comes from the French "with heart". Why does it have this root meaning? Because it takes heart to act bravely. That's how my childhood Karate teacher used the word: when I was practicing with courage, power and focus, he would say "you have alot of heart today" (indeed, many old-school warriors use the phrase "fighting with heart" in that way).
If courage is acting "with heart", we've lost heart. And without heart, we cannot face the truth.
So how do we regain our heart? Well, let's start with what gets our hearts beating.
Remember that the mother bear is one of the fiercest animals of all. Just get between a mother bear and her cub and you'll see what I mean. It is her love of her cub which gives her the heart to face any enemy when her cub is threatened. It is not her level of testosterone, but rather her love for her cub which makes her so fierce.
Just as discipline is more than just willpower, courage stems from something bigger than just cajones. In fact, the strongest courage comes from the love of something we care about, since our heart will sustain us even when the chips are really down and we are really up against a tyrant. As the ancient Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu said: "Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength, while loving someone deeply gives you courage. "
In addition, we're no longer living in the old west. Individualism is very important in numerous ways, but we can only win against the tyrants as a team, as a community, as a nation. And only by opening our hearts to what matters will we be able to work together, to fight for all of our kids, and all of our freedom. Only then will we be able to put the crooks and the looters and the tyrants back in the box.
Do we care about our kids, our significant others, our parents, our friends? Do we care about the freedom to choose what we want, instead of having our "great leader" choose for us?
If not, what DO we care about? Because if that is where your heart is, that is what will give you courage.
I care too much about my kids and their future to be afraid. I care enough about them that it gets my heart beating, connects me to something bigger than myself, and that gives me courage, even when the chips are down.
Courage is an innate human quality. It is within each of us, waiting to reveal itself when we open our hearts. When we act with heart, by definition, we are courageous.
Humor Gives Perspective … So Laugh a Little
Humor is important, because it helps us laugh at – instead of giving into – our fears.
Wise people in cultures around the world have understood the power of humor to melt fear and to let people gain perspective on what is or isn't really a threat.
See this for a great example of humor about the threat of terror
Fear Is Not a Christian Value
The vast majority of Americans who are Christians should remember that fear is not a Christian value.
Jesus repeatedly told his disciples and other people not to be afraid. For example, in the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus:
- Speaks these words to the disciples during a storm (14:27)
- To Peter, James and John during the Transfiguration (17:7)
- To the women outside the empty tomb (28:10)
- To the disciples he is about to send out to teach, preach and heal, he says, "Have no fear" of those who have called the master of the house Beelzebul and will surely also malign those of his household (10:25)
- "Do not be afraid," Jesus says, reminding those he is sending out of the One whose eye is on the sparrow. "You are of more value than many sparrows" (10:31)
(In other sections of the Bible, Jesus said do not be afraid another 10 times.)
Jesus told his flock not to be afraid. Christians that succumb to fear are not following Christ's teachings. Those of us who succumb to fear are following those who would manipulate – instead of free – us.


text:
WASHINGTON Law enforcement and counterterrorism officials, citing lapses in compliance with surveillance orders, are pushing to overhaul a federal law that requires phone and broadband carriers to ensure that their networks can be wiretapped, federal officials say.
The officials say tougher legislation is needed because some telecommunications companies in recent years have begun new services and made system upgrades that caused technical problems for surveillance. They want to increase legal incentives and penalties aimed at pushing carriers like Verizon, AT&T, and Comcast to ensure that any network changes will not disrupt their ability to conduct wiretaps.
An Obama administration task force that includes officials from the Justice and Commerce Departments, the F.B.I. and other agencies recently began working on draft legislation to strengthen and expand the Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act, a 1994 law that says telephone and broadband companies must design their services so that they can begin conducting surveillance of a target immediately after being presented with a court order.
There is not yet agreement over the details, according to officials familiar with the deliberations, but they said the administration intends to submit a package to Congress next year.
Albert Gidari Jr., a lawyer who represents telecommunications firms, said corporations were likely to object to increased government intervention in the design or launch of services. Such a change, he said, could have major repercussions for industry innovation, costs and competitiveness.
"The government's answer is 'don't deploy the new services wait until the government catches up,' " Mr. Gidari said. "But that's not how it works. Too many services develop too quickly, and there are just too many players in this now."
To bolster their case that telecom companies should face greater pressure to stay compliant, security agencies are citing two previously undisclosed episodes in which investigators were stymied from carrying out court-approved surveillance for weeks or even months because of technical problems with two major carriers.
The disclosure that the administration is seeking ways to increase the government's leverage over carriers already subject to the 1994 law comes less than a month after The New York Times reported on a related part of the effort: a plan to bring Internet companies that enable communications like Gmail, Facebook, Blackberry and Skype under the law's mandates for the first time, a demand that would require major changes to some services' technical designs and business models.
The push to expand and the 1994 law is the latest example of a dilemma over how to balance Internet freedom with security needs in an era of rapidly evolving and globalized technology. The issue has added importance because the surveillance technologies developed by the United States to hunt for terrorists and drug traffickers can be also used by repressive regimes to hunt for political dissidents.
An F.B.I. spokesman said the bureau would not comment about the telecom proposal, citing the sensitivity of internal deliberations. But last month, in response to questions about the Internet communications services proposal, Valerie E. Caproni, the F.B.I.'s general counsel, emphasized that the government was seeking only to prevent its surveillance power from eroding.
Starting in late 2008 and lasting into 2009, another law enforcement official said, a "major" communications carrier was unable to carry out more than 100 court wiretap orders. The initial interruptions lasted eight months, the official said, and a second lapse lasted nine days.
This year, another major carrier experienced interruptions ranging from nine days to six weeks and was unable to comply with 14 wiretap orders. Its interception system "works sporadically and typically fails when the carrier makes any upgrade to its network," the official said.
In both cases, the F.B.I. sent engineers to help the companies fix the problems. The bureau spends about $20 million a year on such efforts.
The official declined to name the companies, saying it would be unwise to advertise which networks have problems or to risk damaging the cooperative relationships the government has with them. For similar reasons, the government has not sought to penalize carriers over wiretapping problems.
Under current law, if a carrier meets the industry-set standard for compliance providing the content of a call or e-mail, along with identifying information like its recipient, time and location it achieves "safe harbor" and cannot be fined. If the company fails to meet the standard, it can be fined by a judge or the Federal Communication Commission.
But in practice, law enforcement officials say, neither option is ever invoked. When problems come to light, officials are reluctant to make formal complaints against companies because their overriding goal is to work with their technicians to fix the problem.
That dynamic can create an incentive to let problems linger: Once a carrier's interception capability is restored even if it was fixed at taxpayer expense its service is compliant again with the 1994 law, so the issue is moot.
The F.C.C. also moves slowly, officials complain, in handling disputes over the "safe harbor" standard. For example, in 2007 the F.B.I. asked for more than a dozen changes, like adding a mandate to turn over additional details about cellphone locations. The F.C.C. has still not acted on that petition.
Civil liberties groups contend that the agency has been far too willing on other occasions to expand the reach of the 1994 law.
"We think that the F.C.C. has already conceded too much to the bureau," said Marc Rotenberg, the president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "The F.B.I.'s ability to have such broad reach over technical standard-setting was never anticipated in the 1994 act."
The Obama administration is circulating several ideas for legislation that would increase the government's leverage over carriers, officials familiar with the deliberations say.
One proposal is to increase the likelihood that a firm pays a financial penalty over wiretapping lapses like imposing retroactive fines after problems are fixed, or billing companies for the cost of government technicians that were brought in to help.
Another proposal would create an incentive for companies to show new systems to the F.B.I. before deployment. Under the plan, an agreement with the bureau certifying that the system is acceptable would be an alternative "safe harbor," ensuring the firm could not be fined.
The proposal may also modify how the "safe harbor" standard is established. Five years ago, the F.B.I. drafted legislation that would have given the Justice Department greater power over the standard while requiring the F.C.C. to act more quickly on petitions. That bill, however, was not ultimately filed.


text:
Applying Technology to Save Lives
Given the number of tragic news stories we've already heard this early in the year, I thought I'd turn the tables and revisit one of the most incredible positive stories of 2010. On October 13, the last of the 33 Chilean miners who were trapped 2,067 feet underground for more than 2 months, was rescued.
Given the number of tragic news stories we've already heard this early in the year, I thought I'd turn the tables and revisit one of the most incredible positive stories of 2010. On October 13, the last of the 33 Chilean miners who were trapped 2,067 feet underground for more than 2 months, was rescued. It was a painstaking and treacherous process to bring each one to safety, but it was successful thanks to the efforts of many and the technological advances in drilling equipment and search and rescue operations.
One company, Center Rock Inc., of Berlin, Pa., was responsible for production of the highly advanced, low-profile Hole Opener drills that helped shorten the rescue by 2.5 months from the original time estimate. The drills use highly compressed air (instead of fluids) to drive drill bits and clear rock fragments. They use multiple pneumatic hammers, each steadily pounding a drill bit to crush rock as the drill rotates. The compressed air also circulates to blow rock flakes and dust upward, away from the bits.
In this rescue operation, Center Rock used three drill sizes. Machined components for the drills include the flange and receivers at the top, the flat plates, the chucks for the hammers and a long, serrated pilot. During production of the drills, in addition to turning operations, areas of each bit may require flat, contour, radial or axial milling, and each bit may require various holes at different angles. These features, combined, lend themselves well to multitask machining.
Center Rock uses GibbsCAM to program the line-up of machine tools, which include three Doosan two-axis lathes, two Mazak horizontal machining centers, and two Doosan multi-tasking machines. The company has been using GibbsCAM mill-turn and three-axis milling modules since 2005 and GibbsCAM rotary milling and advanced MTM modules since 2006. The integrated modules open SolidWorks CAD models directly so that programmers can use and manipulate engineers' solid-model geometry to program their CNCs.
Because all operations are integrated, the programmer can stay within the same user interface without having to exit an active module to initiate another. All operations—turning, milling, drilling and non-cutting motion such as tool changes, turret motion and transfers between spindles—are executed within the same interface. The software also provides automated and interactive ways to insert syncs (wait codes) and displays flows for each tool group side by side, simplifying toolpath optimization for the programmer.
Just as Center Rock was able to use its technology and expertise to greatly reduce the time needed to rescue the miners, GibbsCAM helps the company's programmers and machinists speed production of drills and drill bits every day.


text:
Streamline Service Operations
When you streamline quotes, work orders, invoices and payments, you spend less time chasing money and more time adding to your bottom line.Find out more
Keep Track of Your Jobs
Find your people, your equipment and your customer's inventory quickly and accurately. Waste less time and get more done.Find out more
Schedule Jobs Better
Find extra hours each day by streamlining scheduling. Get the right people to the right place at the right time every time.Find out more
Field Service Management Software Explained.
Just started looking for field service software? Heard about it from a friend?
Field Service Management Software Buyer's Guide
Learn about total costs, deployment options, and even questions to ask vendors during the buying process. Get the Guide
Be More Efficient Before, During, & After a Service Visit
This eBook is full of tips and tricks to help your technicians be more proactive and reactive out in the field. Get the eBook
5 Questions to Consider When Selecting Field Service Software
Started researching field service management software solutions? There is a lot to consider when it comes to choosing the right solution for your business.
"The ability to accept payment on site, email invoices and access customer information through mobile…"
Tom Davis, Owner Davis Heating and Cooling


text:
Talk about living like royalty. Prince William and Kate Middleton (now Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge) charmed fans this weekend with a photo opp-ready, whirlwind social schedule.
The pair started by celebrating the Queen's 85th birthday on Saturday, returning to the balcony at Buckingham Palace where they kissed on their wedding day, according to People.
After a ceremony for the monarch, who has reigned since 1952, Kate rode in a horse-drawn carriage fit for a princess, while Prince William rode a horse, wearing the red uniform of the Irish Guards, People reported. The event was Kate's first as Duchess of Cambridge.
Later in the day, she met up with her popular sister Pippa for the wedding of friends Sam Waley-Cohen and Annabel Ballin, in Berkshire, England, People reported. Kate recycled a black and white cocktail dress she wore on a night out in London during her brief split with Wills, U.K. tabloid the Daily Mail reported.
Will and Kate found new outfits for Sunday, when the royal family celebrated the 90th birthday of Prince William's grandfather, Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh. The newlyweds rolled up in a vintage Rolls Royce wearing an impeccable dark suit and a periwinkle blue jacquard coat dress. The eagle-eyed Daily Mail pointed out that Kate wore the dress for a wedding in 2009, too. If it ain't broke ...
Selected Reading: People, Daily Mail, E! News


text:
Trapped between the covers of Nevada's Black Book
Frank Citro Jr. is on the list of undesirables blackballed by casino regulators. At 68, he's trying to do what no one has ever done: Get off while he's still alive.
LAS VEGAS — Frank Citro Jr. is holding court at his regular table at a dingy roadhouse, about as far from the glamour of the Strip as you can get.
Men in suits stop to pay their respects, some kissing the cologne-splashed cheek of the guy they call Frankie. It's a gesture of affection, like those of his neighborhood cronies in Jersey City, back in the old days.
But more recent days haven't been so kind to Frankie. He loves this live-music joint, don't get him wrong. When you're Frank Citro Jr., there are only so many nightspots in this town where you're still welcome.
For 23 years, Frankie has been included in Nevada's Black Book, officially the "Excluded Person List," an index of desert undesirables blackballed by the state's casino regulators. Since its inception in 1960, the book has included such mobsters as William "Icepick Willie" Alderman, Murray "the Camel" Humphries and Chicago crime boss Sam "the Cigar" Giancana.
Black Book inclusion means you can't own, manage or even enter a casino. The only way off the list is to die, and even then state regulators require a death certificate as proof that you are, indeed, truly departed.
Now the 68-year-old Frankie is attempting something never tried in the book's history: He wants off the list while he's still alive.
"I don't belong in this book," he said in his thick Jersey accent, an unlit Camel dangling from his lips. "I never cheated a casino, never had a fight there. I'm just supposedly a notorious felon. There are lots of felons in this town. Why me?"
Rumors of the move have caught Nevada's Gaming Control Board by surprise, and officials had to consult their rules to determine that the challenge is indeed allowable. Now Frankie is collecting documents and contacting character witnesses before his attorney requests a hearing with the board.
"For someone to come forward after so many years on the book," said
In 1985, Frankie and six others were convicted of bookmaking and loan-sharking operations in Southern California and Las Vegas that prosecutors said charged clients as much as 1,000% interest. He spent two years in prison.
I never cheated a casino, never had a fight there. I'm just supposedly a notorious felon."
— Frank Citro Jr.
To gaming officials, the verdict — not to mention the fact he had consorted with known mobsters — made him the kind of notorious character they didn't want in Nevada's casinos. So they put him in the Black Book, a distinction that dims even the brightest lights of Sin City. Being inside a casino, he knows, can mean arrest and even jail time.
Frankie says the book discriminates against Italian Americans — half the list's 33 current members have Italian surnames — and promotes Mafia stereotypes. This in a city that has embraced its organized crime roots with not one, but two, mob museums.
Frankie is stubborn. Since being placed in the book in 1990, he has refused to leave Las Vegas to avoid the slightest hint of surrender. He continues to embrace a street-wise image, making wisecracks, gesturing with his hands and shoulders, ending sentences in "boom, boom, boom." He likes to say he knows only two real tough guys, and the other one sends him a Christmas card every year.
Frankie grew up the youngest of three sons in an Italian neighborhood in northern New Jersey. He showed an entrepreneur's eye early on, shining shoes for neighborhood thugs. At age 13, he chased two guys into an alley. One put a gun to his head. He flinched and he hated himself for it. That's when he vowed to never fear another man.
Soon he was running numbers, fencing stolen goods. He became a bouncer. He worked collections. He bare-knuckle boxed for years, breaking people's bones in and out of the ring.
He was a tough guy, he said, but not a made guy. Frankie said he was never a member of organized crime. "I never wanted those guys telling me what I had to do," he said. "Only my mother had that power."
While starting his federal sentence, Frankie realized he was going to miss a crucial time in the life of his 1-year-old son, Francesco. That's when he swore he'd never go back to prison, even if it meant cleaning toilets. One of the first jobs he got on the outside was running his own janitorial company.
"How many people promise to never return to jail again?" said his 20-year-old daughter, Bettina. "My dad actually kept his word."
For a quarter-century, Frankie has avoided jail and is off probation. He donates time for charity — rounding up bands and singing his beloved doo-wop music at fundraisers.
But sometimes it seems Frankie has tried to capitalize on his past. He briefly starred in a series of Internet skits called "Frankie's Way: Real-Life Wise Guy," which producers unsuccessfully sought to sell to cable television.
So why embrace the stereotype when he's trying to rehabilitate his reputation?
"It's all I've got left," he said of his boom-bah persona. "They've made it so I can't find work in this town. It's like I have leprosy."
Frankie showed up for his Gaming Control Board hearing in 1990 dressed in a tuxedo. It was a minor gesture of mock respect: Just out of prison, he figured he had paid his dues. The federal government had confiscated his Las Vegas luxury home. Now Nevada wanted to banish him from its casinos?
State prosecutors challenged his character, waving headlines of his racketeering trial that screamed phrases like "brass-knuckle therapy." Frankie found that particularly insulting: He'd never hit a man with anything but his own fists.
They've made it so I can't find work in this town. It's like I have leprosy."
— Frank Citro Jr.
Officials decided he was "notorious and unsavory," a guy with mobster cronies. "They just buried me," he said later. "They buried a man who's still alive."
Critics call the book an outdated relic of an era when wiseguys called the shots. Card cheats and slot crooks now pose a bigger threat to the industry, and some appear on the list. The last entry, Philadelphia mobster Frank Bulgarino, was added in 2004.
"I represented a lot of people in that book," said Oscar Goodman, a former mob lawyer who later became Las Vegas mayor. "Many haven't even been convicted of a crime. They just supposedly brought ignominy, scorn or derision to this great state of Nevada. It's draconian and it's silly."
Nevada's Excluded Person List was launched with the names of 11 reputed gangland figures. The book was later imitated by gaming states such as New Jersey, Michigan and Mississippi.
The Black Book really isn't a book and it's not even black. Originally bound by a black leather cover, it's now a shiny gray binder. It still strikes fear in nominees.
When alleged mobster Stephen "The Whale" Cino learned of his hearing in 1997, the 325-pound felon told state investigators, "You just ruined my lunch." At his hearing in 1987, gangster Frank "Lefty" Rosenthal screamed that he had dined with many board members, only to be stabbed in the back.
Some friends have turned their backs on Frankie, but he has new believers in his camp.
Like the North Las Vegas police officer he helped raise money for children with cancer. "I'm a cop. I deal with lots of people who did things 40 years ago, now trying to eke out a living," Steve Noahr said. "You pay your debt to society, why be persecuted for life?"
Former Nevada Lt. Gov. Lonnie Hammargren said that "if anyone gets off that list, it should be Frankie."
He added: "It's not just his past that put him in that book; it's where he came from, his speech, his accent. At this stage, he's probably cleaner than 90% of corporate Las Vegas making deals behind closed doors today."
Taylor, the Nevada Gaming Control Board official, disagreed: "Even today, I don't know if we'd still want Frank Citro frequenting our casinos."
For now Frankie makes do. He's had a succession of business ventures with only fleeting success — including a bar and strip club manager, plumber and carpenter. Job interviews go well, until bosses learn about the Black Book. He isn't obligated to tell them, but the list pops up in a quick Internet search, and some in this town see it as a bigger black mark than the racketeering conviction.
Before the Black Book, he owned a nice house. Now he frets about paying rent for the space where he parks his double-wide trailer. The frustration has taken a toll on his health. A doctor has warned him of a possible blocked artery. But Frankie says he's not having any
With sadness in his voice, he mentions the 1994 film "
Now Frankie awaits his new day in casino court, seeking redemption in a realm where there have been no second chances. This time, he thinks he'll skip the tux.
[For the record: A photo caption in a previous version of this article misspelled Bettina Citro's name as Betina.]
Watch the video: Frankie Citro on his quest
More great reads from Column One:
Vegas Buddhist endures brutal '100 days' ritual
Dapper Day at Disneyland, the nattiest place on Earth
NCAA to NBA millions: UCLA star's father mapped out a dream
Must-read stories from the L.A. Times
Get all the day's most vital news with our Today's Headlines newsletter, sent every weekday morning.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.