text:
"Organic" Foods:
Certification Does Not Protect Consumers
Stephen Barrett, M.D.
If you, as a consumer, want to purchase a fake or a fraud of one kind or another, should your government guarantee your right to do so? More than that, is your government obligated to prosecute one who, knowing of your propensity for fraud, tricks you into buying the genuine in place of buying the fake? Remembering that "your government" is all the rest of us, is it right for you to take our time and money to underwrite such ridiculous exercises as making sure you are cheated when you want to be cheated? And must we penalize the man who breaks his promise to cheat you?
These astute questions were raised in 1972 by Dick Beeler, editor of Animal Health and Nutrition, who was concerned about laws being adopted in California and Oregon to certify "organic" foods. Those laws signaled the beginning of efforts that culminated in 1990 with passage of the U.S. Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA), which ordered the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to set certification standards. Although USDA had opposed passage of the act, the Alar scare plus a campaign by environmental, consumer, and farm groups persuaded Congress to include it in the 1990 Farm Bill [1].
|As directed by the law, the Secretary of Agriculture established a National Organic Standards Board to help develop a list of substances permissible in organic production and handling and to advise the Secretary on other aspects of implementing a National Organic Program. In 1992, the Secretary appointed 15 people, 8 of whom were industry members. The board held 12 full-board meetings and 5 joint committee meetings and received additional input through public hearings and written submissions from interested persons. It presented its recommendations to the Secretary in 1994 and issued 30 subsequent addenda. Regulations were proposed in 1997, modified in 1998, and are now in effect. As of October 21, 2002, producers who meet USDA standards are permitted to display the seal pictured here on their packaging.
Total retail sales of the organic industry reportedly rose from $1 billion in 1990 to $7.8 billion in 2000 [3]. "Certified" organic cropland production expanded from about 400,000 acres in 1992 to 1,350,000 in 1999 [2] to 5 million in 2016 {3]. Despite this growth, the organic industry represents a very small percentage of total agricultural production and sales—only about 0.3% of U.S. cropland and 0.2% of U.S. pasture was certified organic in 2001 [4,5]. Industry trade organizations state that the sales of organic produee reached about $18 billion in 2006, rose steadily to about $40 billion in 2015 [6], and reached $52.5 billion in 2018 [6]. However, the numbers reported by the USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service are much lower [3].
Nebulous Definitions
The term "organic foods" refers to the methods used to produce the foods rather than to characteristics of the food themselves. The most common concept of "organically grown" food was articulated in 1972 by Robert Rodale, editor of Organic Gardening and Farming magazine, at a public hearing:
Food grown without pesticides; grown without artificial fertilizers; grown in soil whose humus content is increased by the additions of organic matter, grown in soil whose mineral content is increased by the application of natural mineral fertilizers; has not been treated with preservatives, hormones, antibiotics, etc. [8]
In 1980, a team of scientists appointed by the USDA concluded that there was no universally accepted definition of "organic farming." Their report stated:
The organic movement represents a spectrum of practices, attitudes, and philosophies. On the one hand are those organic practitioners who would not use chemical fertilizers or pesticides under any circumstances. These producers hold rigidly to their purist philosophy. At the other end of the spectrum, organic farmers espouse a more flexible approach. While striving to avoid the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, these practitioners do not rule them out entirely. Instead, when absolutely necessary, some fertilizers and also herbicides are very selectively and sparingly used as a second line of defense. Nevertheless, these farmers, too, consider themselves to be organic farmers [9].
Passage of the Organic Foods Production Act forced the USDA to develop an official definition. On December 16, 1997, the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service proposed rules for a National Organic Program [10]. The proposal applied to all types of agricultural products and all aspects of their production and handling, ranging from soil fertility management to the packaging and labeling of the final product. The proposal included: (a) national standards for production and handling, (b) a National List of approved synthetic substances, (c) a certification program, (d) a program for accrediting certifiers, (e) labeling requirements, (f) enforcement provisions, and (g) rules for importing equivalent products. The proposed rule defined organic farming and handling as:
A system that is designed and managed to produce agricultural products by the use of methods and substances that maintain the integrity of organic agricultural products until they reach the consumer. This is accomplished by using, where possible, cultural, biological and mechanical methods, as opposed to using substances, to fulfill any specific function within the system so as to: maintain long-term soil fertility; increase soil biological activity; ensure effective pest management; recycle wastes to return nutrients to the land; provide attentive care for farm animals; and handle the agricultural products without the use of extraneous synthetic additives or processing in accordance with the Act and the regulations in this part.
The weed and pest-control methods to which this refers include crop rotation, hand cultivation, mulching, soil enrichment, and encouraging beneficial predators and microorganisms. If these methods are not sufficient, various listed chemicals can be used. (The list does not include cytotoxic chemicals that are carbon-based.) The proposal did not call for monitoring specific indicators of soil and water quality, but left the selection of monitoring activities to the producer in consultation with the certifying agent.
For raising animals, antibiotics would not be permitted as growth stimulants but would be permitted to counter infections. The rules permit up to 20% of animal feed to be obtained from non-organic sources. This was done because some nutrients (such as trace minerals) are not always available organically. Irradiation, which can reduce or eliminate certain pests, kill disease-causing bacteria, and prolong food shelf-life, would be permitted during processing. Genetic engineering would also be permissible.
Health-food-industry trade and consumer publications expressed widespread dissatisfaction with the 1997 proposal. The Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture, for example, called it "Fatally flawed." [11] The Organic Farmers Marketing Association stated:
The definition of organic as written in the proposed national organic standards lacks the holistic approach central to organic practices. The proposed rules take a reductionist approach to organic food production that eliminates key concepts such as the health of the agro-ecosystem and biodiversity on the farm.
The USDA received more than 270,000 comments on the proposed rules [12]. One distributors' association official wrote that if the rules are implemented, its members would seek to buy its agricultural products from foreign sources. Others complained that the proposed fees were too high. Other objections included permitted use of amino acids as growth promoters, antibiotics (when necessary to save the animal's life), synthetic animal drugs, food additives, and animal feed from non-organic sources. Certification agencies with "higher standards" objected that they would be prohibited from stating this on their labels. Some poultry farmers objected to provisions enabling intermingling of range-free poultry and other poultry. However, the vast majority of the objections pertain to the provisions that permitted irradiation, genetic engineering, and the use of sewage sludge as fertilizer [13]. The final regulations,published in December 2002, eliminated these three provisions. Canada, which in 1999 became the first country to establish a national organic standard, also excludes these methods [14].
Premium Price—For What?
The organic rules are intended to address production methods rather than the physical qualities of the products themselves. In a news release that accompaied the 1997 rules, Glickman stated:
What is organic? Generally, it is agriculture produced through a natural as opposed to synthetic process. The natural portion of the definition is fairly obvious, but process is an equally critical distinction. When we certify organic, we are certifying not just a product but the farming and handling practices that yield it. When you buy a certified organic tomato, for instance, you are buying the product of an organic farm. And, consumers are willing to fork over a little more for that tomato. They've shown that they will pay a premium for organic food. National standards are our way of ensuring that consumers get what they pay for.
I disagree. Many consumers who "fork over a little more" believe that the foods themselves are more nutritious, safer, and tastier. But the USDA proposal itself noted that, "No distinctions should be made between organically and non-organically produced products in terms of quality, appearance, or safety." In other words, no claim should be made that the foods themselves are better—or even different! Some consumers believe that buying "organic" foster agricultural practices that are better for the environment.
Rodale Press's New Farm Organic Price Index (OPX) compared the prices of about 40 organic and conventionally grown foods in 2003 and 2004. The organic foods tended to cost signiifcantly more, as they had in previouly published studies.
More Nutritious?
Organic foods are certainly not more nutritious [15]. The nutrient content of plants is determined primarily by heredity. Mineral content may be affected by the mineral content of the soil, but this has no significance in the overall diet. If essential nutrients are missing from the soil, the plant will not grow. If plants grow, that means the essential nutrients are present. Experiments conducted for many years have found no difference in the nutrient content of organically grown crops and those grown under standard agricultural conditions.
Many "organic" proponents suggest that their foods are safer because they have lower levels of pesticide residues. However, the pesticide levels in our food supply are not high. In some situations, pesticides even reduce health risks by preventing the growth of harmful organisms, including molds that produce toxic substances [16].
To protect consumers, the FDA sets tolerance levels in foods and conducts frequent "market basket" studies wherein foods from regions throughout the United States are purchased and analyzed. The USDA's Pesticide Data Program (PDP) has been monitoring pesticide residues since 1992 and publishes its findings annually. The Monitoring Programs Division administers PDP activities, including the sampling, testing, and reporting of pesticide residues on agricultural commodities in the U.S. food supply, with an emphasis on those commodities highly consumed by infants and children. The program is implemented through cooperation with State agriculture departments and other Federal agencies. The studies have always concluded that America's dietary intakes are well within international and Environmental Protection Agency standards.
Most comparative studies conducted since the early 1970s have found that the pesticide levels in foods designated organic were similar to those that were not. In 1997, Consumer Reports purchased about a thousand pounds of tomatoes, peaches, green bell peppers, and apples in five cities and tested them for more than 300 synthetic pesticides. Traces were detected in 77% of conventional foods and 25% of organically labeled foods, but only one sample of each exceeded the federal limit [17].
Pesticides can locate on the surface of foods as well as beneath the surface. The amounts that washing can remove depends on their location, the amount and temperature of the rinse water, and whether detergent is used. Most people rinse their fruits and vegetables with plain water before eating them. In fact, Consumer Reports on Health has recommended this [18].Consumer Reports stated that it did not do so because the FDA tests unwashed products. The amount of pesticide removed by simple rinsing has not been scientifically studied but is probably small. Consumer Reports missed a golden opportunity to assess this.
Do pesticides found in conventional foods pose a health threat? Does the difference in pesticide content warrant buying "organic" foods? Consumer Reports equivocates: "For consumers in general, the unsettling truth is that no one really knows what a lifetime of consuming the tiny quantities of foods might do to a person. The effect, if any, is likely to be small for most individuals—but may be significant for the population at large." But the editors also advise, "No one should avoid fruits and vegetables for fear of pesticides; the health benefits of these foods overwhelm any possible risk."
Manfred Kroger, Ph.D., Quackwatch consultant and Professor of Food Science at The Pennsylvania State University, has put the matter more bluntly:
Scientific agriculture has provided Americans with the safest and most abundant food supply in the world. Agricultural chemicals are needed to maintain this supply. The risk from pesticide residue, if any, is minuscule, is not worth worrying about, and does not warrant paying higher prices.
A more recent review concluded:
- Organic production is a respectable effort to produce food without contaminants, but there is a lack of scientific evidence supporting the idea that organic food is an obviously safer choice.
- The consumer belief in finding a safer food alternative through organic production is not supported by the scientific community due to the lack of consistent scientific evidence and often contradictory reports.
- Personal convictions relying on an emotional route instead of a rational one lead to a divergence between the public and scientists regarding health hazard perceptions.
- Although organic food has a lower incidence of pesticide residues, the frequency of pesticide-contaminated food is stable and most of the time the residues are below the allowable limits. It is realistic to say that overall the detected contaminants do not [cause] any major health concern for the general population [19].
"Organically grown" foods are not inherently tastier than conventionally grown foods. Taste is influenced by freshness, which may depend on how far the products must be shipped from farmer to consumer. What kinds of locally grown fruits and vegetables are available varies from community to community. Whether they are organically or conventionally produced is unlikely to make any difference.
In the early 1990s, Israeli researchers made 460 assessments of 9 different fruits and vegetables and no significant difference in quality between "organic" and conventionally grown samples [20]. The Consumer Reports' study found no consistent differences in appearance, flavor, or texture.
Organically produced ("range-free) poultry are said to be raised in an environment where they are free to roam. To use this term, handlers must sign an affidavit saying that the chickens are provided with access to the outdoors. A recent taste test conducted by Consumer Reports rated two brands of free-range chicken as average among nine brands tested. Its March 1998 issue stated few chickens choose to roam and that one manager said that free-ranging probably detracts from taste because it decreases the quality of the bird's food intake [21].
Better for the Environment?
Many buyers of "organic" foods believe that the extra money they pay will ultimately benefit the environment by encouraging more farmers to use "organic" methods. But doing this cannot have much effect because "organic" agriculture is too inefficient to meet the world's food needs and environmental impact also variues from one type of crop to another [22]. Moreover, the dividing line between organic and conventional agriculture is not sharp because various practices are not restricted to one or the other. For example, "organic" farmers tend not to use pesticides, but faced with threatened loss of crops, they may change their mind. If certain patterns of pesticide use cause more harm than good and there is a way to remedy the situation, the people concerned about it can seek regulatory solutions. I don't believe that paying extra for food will benefit anybody but those who sell it.
Special Healing Powers?
Many offbeat practitioners recommend organically grown foods as part of their alleged treatment regimens. The most extreme claim`` I have seen comes from A Perfect Healing, a small Florida-based nonprofit in "committed to the use, education, research, and agriculture of organically grown foods and nutritional supplements in the recovery from disease." [23] Its Guidestar summary claimed:
Organic foods embody thousands of antibiotic and anti-viral elements that are present only in highly composted organic soil. When we eat these foods, they deposit these elements absorbed from the soil into our bodies, where they can then go on to patrol and clean out all forms of disease and prevent further attack. Even cancers and other forms of seemingly non-infectious disease have been cured this way. These disease fighting elements and the high level of nutrients that organic foods receive from such a nutritious soil are very powerful. They have been proven to return many a diseased individual back to health [24].
A 2017 meta-analysis that examined whether eating organic foods is associated with better health concluded: "The beneficial health effects of vegetables and fruits and other foods recommended in a balanced diet are well documented, but the jury is still out and not ready to conclude whether choosing the organic alternatives would provide additional benefits." [25]
In 2019, Randy Constant, who led the largest known "organic" food fraud scheme in U.S. history, was sentenced to serve 122 months in prison [26]. Constant's scheme called for farmers to add small amounts of USDA-certified grains to conventionally grown grains and represent the products as certified. The products were then priced higher than conventional grains but lower than certified products whose sellers who were complying with USDA rules. The grains were sold mainly for use as animal feed to companies that marketed organic meat and meat products. Three other farmers whom he recruited to join his scheme received shorter sentences. All four had pleaded guilty to wire-fraud charges and cooperated with investigators. A fifth farmer pleaded guilty in the case and is awaiting sentencing. Constant admitted that his scheme involved at least $142,433,475 in grain sales with the vast majority of sales being fraudulent. As part of his plea, he agreed to forfeit $128,190,128 in proceeds.
The Bottom Line
The revised rules went into effect on October 21, 2002. The latest USDA definition states:
Organic food is produced by farmers who emphasize the use of renewable resources and the conservation of soil and water to enhance environmental quality for future generations. Organic meat, poultry, eggs, and dairy products come from animals that are given no antibiotics or growth hormones. Organic food is produced without using most conventional pesticides; petroleum-based fertilizers or sewage sludge-based fertilizers; bio-engineering; or ionizing radiation. Before a product can be labeled "organic," a Government-approved certifier inspects the farm where the food is grown to make sure the farmer is following all the rules necessary to meet USDA organic standards. Companies that handle or process organic food before it gets to your local supermarket or restaurant must be certified, too [27].
A comprehensive review published the same year concluded:
- Studies comparing foods derived from organic and conventional growing systems were assessed for three key areas: nutritional value, sensory quality, and food safety. It is evident from this assessment that there are few well-controlled studies that are capable of making a valid comparison. With the possible exception of nitrate content, there is no strong evidence that organic and conventional foods differ in concentrations of various nutrients.
- While there are reports indicating that organic and conventional fruits and vegetables may differ on a variety of sensory qualities, the findings are inconsistent.
- While it is likely that organically grown foods are lower in pesticide residues, there has been very little documentation of residue levels [28].
In 2006, the Institute of Food Technologists concluded:
While many studies demonstrate . . . qualitative differences between organic and conventional foods, it is premature to conclude that either food system is superior to the other with respect to safety or nutritional composition. Pesticide residues, naturally occurring toxins, nitrates, and polyphenolic compounds exert their health risks or benefits on a dose-related basis, and data do not yet exist to ascertain whether the differences in the levels of such chemicals between organic foods and conventional foods are of biological significance [29].
In 2009, after reviewing 162 scientific studies published between 1958 and February 2008, the British Food Standards Agency concluded:
No evidence of a difference in content of nutrients and other substances between organically and conventionally produced crops and livestock products was detected for the majority of nutrients assessed in this review suggesting that organically and conventionally produced crops and livestock products are broadly comparable in their nutrient content. The differences detected in content of nutrients and other substances between organically and conventionally produced crops and livestock products are biologically plausible and most likely relate to differences in crop or animal management, and soil quality. It should be noted that these conclusions relate to the evidence base currently available, which contains limitations in the design and in the comparability of studies. There is no good evidence that increased dietary intake, of the nutrients identified in this review to be present in larger amounts in organically than in conventionally produced crops and livestock products, would be of benefit to individuals consuming a normal varied diet, and it is therefore unlikely that these differences in nutrient content are relevant to consumer health [30].
Nevertheless, if you want to pay extra for your food, the U.S. Government will help you do so. Violators of the rules can be fined up to $10,000 per violation. But organic "certification," no matter what the rules, will not protect consumers. Foods certified as "organic" will neither be safer nor more nutritious than "regular" foods. Nor is there any logical reason to conclude that they have any special disease-curing properties. They will just cost more and may lessen public confidence in the safety of "ordinary" foods. Instead of legitimizing health nonsense, our government should do more to attack its spread.
- Larkin M. Organic foods get government "blessing" despite claims that aren't kosher. Nutrition Forum 8:25-29, 1991.
- Greene CR. U.S. organic farming emerges in the 1990s: Adoption of certified systems. USDA Agricultural Research Service, Resource Economics Division, Information bulletin No. 770, June 2001.
- Dimitri C, Green CR. Recent growth patterns in the U.S. organic food market. USDA Agricultural Research Service, Resource Economics Division, Information bulletin No. 777, Sept 2002.
- Data: Organic production. USDA Economic Research Service, Oct 18, 2002.
- Crouch S. OTA/Neilsen Report: Organic producs is growing. The Shelby Report, July 15, 2016.
- U.S. organic sales break through $50 billion mark in 2018. Organic Trade Association, May 17, 2019.
- USDA National Agricultural Statistic Service. 2016 Certified Organic Survey. NASS Highlights No 2017-6, Oct 2017.
- Rodale R. Testimony. New York State public hearing in the matter of organic foods. New York City, Dec 1, 1972.
- USDA Study Team on Organic Farming. Report and Recommendations on Organic Farming. USDA, July 1980.
- National Organic Program; Proposed Rule. Federal Register 62:65850-65967, 1997.
- Youngberg IG and others. Beyond the "Big Three": A comprehensive analysis of the proposed National Organic Program. Greenbelt, MD: Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture, April 30, 1998.
- Public outcry to organic regs. Natural Foods Merchandiser 19(12):36, 1998.
- National Organic Program: Final rule. Federal Register 65:80547-80684, 2000. (Dec 21, 2000)
- The National Standard of Canada for Organic Agriculture. Ottawa: Canadian Organic Advisory Board (COAB), June 1999.
- Newsome R. Organically grown foods: A scientific status summary by the Institute of Food Technologists' expert panel on food safety and nutrition. Food Technology 44(12):123-130, 1990.
- FDA Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. Pesticide Program: Residue Monitoring 1999, August 2000.
- Organic produce. Consumer Reports 63(1):12-18, 1998.
- Healthy ideas: Wash your produce. Consumer Reports on Health, 10(3):5, 1998.
- Garcia JM, Teixeira P. Organic versus conventional food: A comparison regarding food safety. Food Reviews International 33:424-446, 2017.
- Basker D. Comparison of taste quality between organically and conventionally grown fruits and vegetables. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 7:129-136, 1992.
- Chicken: What you don't know can hurt you. Consumer Reports 63(3):12-18, 1998.
- Richie H. Is organic really better for the environment than conventional agriculture? Our World in Data, Oct 19, 2017.
- Who we are. Animal Concerns Community Web site, accessed July 16, 2006.
- A Perfect Healing. Guidestar Web site, January 31, 2005. [Requires membership to view]
- Brantsæter AL and others. Organic food in the diet: Exposure and health implications. Annual Review of Public Health 38:295-313, 2017.
- Owner of northeast Iowa organic grain brokerage pleads guilty to fraudulent sales totaling nearly $140 million. U.S. Attorney's Office Northern District of Iowa news release, Dec 20, 2018.
- Organic food standards and labels: The facts. USDA Web site, accessed Oct 21, 2002.
- Boume D, Prescott J. A comparison of the nutritional value, sensory qualities, and food safety of organically and conventionally produced foods. Food Science and Nutrition 42:1-34, 2002.
- Winter CK, David SF. Organic foods. Journal of Food Science 71:E117-R124, 2006.
- Dangour A and others. Comparison of composition (nutrients and other substances) of organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs: A systematic review of the available literature. Food Standards Agency, July 2009.
Reader Protest
From an "organic food" fan:
In regards to your comment that organic food is not healthier or safer for you (comments on "juicing") I must say, that is complete BULLSHIT. If you want to eat food that is coated in pesticides, plastic, and vegetable wax, FINE. But don't tell people that farmers who don't use pesticides are QUACKS.
For example, the Web page of the Hartzler Family Dairy—details the history of a company dedicated to pesticide-free food and animal products; I thought you'd like to know there are professional businessmen and worldwide organizations interested in organic farming techniques, as opposed to just a few "QUACKS" who like to overprice their produce. If you check out the site you'll see not all people who prefer organic food are tree-hugging vegetarian wackos who should be dismissed as nutty "quacks."
It is people like you, medical professionals (who should know better) who group organic food with true quackery (like curing cancer with magnets) that really endanger the health of this nation. Granted, this IS America, and you have every right to eat what you want, and even to say you think organic food is overpriced, but don't group organic farmers with "quacks" just because they prefer not to use pesticides. Honestly, is it so nutty to think we would be better off eating food that ISN'T full of chemicals and additives, preservatives and artificial colors? I feel sorry for you. You are so blind to the threat of toxins in your food that colon cancer will probably sneak up on you. You'll tell the doctor, "But I ate a low-fat diet; but I drank my Metamucil everyday; but I stayed away from red meat," but it won't matter. You will subject yourself to chemotherapy (because, being in the medical profession, THAT's the only thing that cures cancer, right?). You'll get sicker and sicker from pumping even more toxins in your body, and when it finally sinks in that maybe you didn't know everything, it will be too late to save you. It's too bad you don't think before you eat. You're fueling your body with poison on a daily basis.
This article was revised on August 22, 2019.


text:
...has been very busy, but very fun. I noticed my last blog post was on the first of June (my poor neglected blog). So here's what I've been up to since then:
On June 2nd, I celebrated a birthday and was a lucky girl to be spoiled by my mom and hubby and received some Project Life to scrapbook with. Not just any Project Life goodies, but some signed by Becky Higgins herself. It was part of a big national contest and was just so fun to play along. ....Riverbend for my birthday and told me to choose any one I wanted him to take me to. I chose Matchbox Twenty and it was SO much fun. I'm a HUGE Rob Thomas fan so it was an amazing gift. Do I have a great kid or what! ? :)
Kings Island. My little man and I on the train...
So now that you see we have been busy just enjoying summer, I have a couple of creative shares. First up, a card inspired by Summer Card Camp 2, an online workshop taught by the amazing Jennifer and Kristina. Such a fun, inspiring class.
I used lots of Distress Stains on this card. I love how the embossed greeting resisted the stain and made it pop on the frosted vellum.
So, one more share I discovered through the web. You MUST check out this video. I was laughing so hard that I was crying. As a crafter, I can totally relate...
I hope it made your day as it did mine. Thanks for hanging with me and stopping by! Hugs!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Personalized, one-on-one instruction is the secret to improved skills and increased confidence. CoachUp now makes private lacrosse coaching affordable and convenient for athletes of all ages and skill levels.
Playing and coaching lacrosse for more than 25 years - I blend passion for the game and old school approach with progressive coaching techniques and drills to build players up.
28.0 Miles away from Waterbury, CT
Offers online training
Girls lacrosse goalie coach wanting to improve players skill, technique, and love of the game.
19.5 Miles away from Waterbury, CT


text:
The first of what will be three reports says many people in the chain of command at ATF are responsible, but the investigation singled out five key figures in the controversy, ranging from the special agent in charge of the ATF's Phoenix field division up to the agency's director.
In Operation Fast and Furious, agents employed a controversial tactic called gun-walking - allowing low-level "straw" buyers in gun-trafficking networks to proceed with loads of weapons that they purchased at gun shops in Arizona. The tactic was designed to track guns to major weapons traffickers and drug cartels, but many of the weapons weren't tracked and wound up at crime scenes in Mexico and the U.S., including the site of a shootout on the U.S. side of the border that resulted in the death of a border agent, Brian Terry.
The former head of the ATF, Kenneth Melson, bears a significant measure of responsibility for failing to ensure that the agency's headquarters personnel adequately supervised the Phoenix field division, says the report compiled by staffers for Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa. The report also says:
-Bill Newell, the special agent in charge in Phoenix for several years, was a major promoter of the strategy in Fast and Furious. The report said Newell failed to understand the basic legal standards needed for interdicting firearms and questioning potential suspects, a shortcoming that prevented interrogation, disruption and possible arrest of straw purchasers.
-Deputy Assistant Director William McMahon knew that no operational safeguards were in place to prevent the firearms from traveling to Mexico, yet made no effort to stop the flow of guns, believing that it was not his job to interfere in Newell's investigations.
-Assistant Director Mark Chait and his superior, Deputy Director Billy Hoover, had several opportunities to put an end to the operation but failed to do so. Hoover knew that Newell had employed risky tactics in the past yet failed to monitor him closely.
Fast and Furious identified more than 2,000 weapons suspected of being illicitly purchased. Some 1,400 of them have yet to be recovered.


text:
New Wave: Bioshock 2 Teaser Site
Well, either that, or Little Big Planet is taking a really grim direction for a sequel. I wake up to a mass of mails from this – FinalSin was first, but cheers to you all – which shows how much even a sliver of information on Bioshock 2 excites people. I suspect we're reaching the point when a lot more is going to be forthcoming soon. But while we wait, we've got some clues on this teaser site to pick over. It's a map, with a series of faux-press clippings pinned to it and a mark on the West of Ireland. Presumably, we're going to get more marks and more evidence as the month goes by. But what to make of it all?
The west of Ireland position suggests to me that we're going to get more of these in a vague circle around wherever they're going to be having their new city – a quasi Atlantis in the middle of the Atlantic would be my bet. The doll is clearly inspired by a Big Daddy. The newspaper clipping tells of a little girl being kidnapped at night by someone able to run at unnatural speed even though carrying a seven year old. He was "thin above average height and wore some kind of 'Red light'" which appeared to be coming from his head. While police think he was wearing a miner's helmet, I suspect there's another explanation. The note from the beach-comber is linking the first two pieces of evidence together – that the toy was found on the beach previously, and it seems to resemble the kidnapper a little. After all, it appears to be a helmet and they could be boots and… well, J.Lynch is dismissed as a nut in red ink by whomever received the mail. Two other minor things there – it starts with "Intrigued by your speculation re: connection betw: footprints + kidnapping". In other words, whoever received the letter has been doing some speculation of their own. I suspect it's whoever's maintaining the actual map itself, and we'll get their commentary again. Secondly, we have a date. March 18th 1967.
AND WHAT WAS NUMBER ONE IN THE CHARTS ON MARCH 18th 1967?
Oh God. We're going down the rabbit hole now. They've got that poor little girl and…
Oh, in Ireland it was actually this:
Though Release Me went into Number 1 the week after – meaning what people were buying after the psychic fallout was actually old Humperdinck. Which could prove something, but probably doesn't.
Anyway – what can we tell about it? Well, the immediate thought is a new Big Daddy… but the high-speed thing is already within the Big Daddy's abilities. The only new feature is the fact he was described as "thin". In terms of speculation, I think we're heading into a "Big Daddy's Without Kids, Go Forth To Get Them" sort of thing. But why? And where? And whom? And how? All will be revealed, unless they decide to end Bioshock 2 on a cliffhanger like bastards.
I also like the tiny elegant icon which is the sound on/off button.


text:
NBC's Pete Williams reports on the major policy shift being considered by the Boy Scouts of America.
The Boy Scouts of America, one of the nation's largest private youth organizations, is actively considering an end to its decades-long policy of banning gay scouts or scout leaders, according to scouting officials and outsiders familiar with internal discussions.
If adopted by the organization's board of directors, it would represent a profound change on an issue that has been highly controversial -- one that even went to the US Supreme Court. The new policy, now under discussion, would eliminate the ban from the national organization's rules, leaving local sponsoring organizations free to decide for themselves whether to admit gay scouts.
"The chartered organizations that oversee and deliver scouting would accept membership and select leaders consistent with their organization's mission, principles or religious beliefs," according to Deron Smith, a spokesman for the Boy Scouts' national organization.
Individual sponsors and parents "would be able to choose a local unit which best meets the needs of their families," Smith said.
The discussion of a potential change in policy is nearing its final stages, according to outside scouting supporters. If approved, the change could be announced as early as next week, after the BSA's national board holds a regularly scheduled meeting.
Only seven months ago, the Boy Scouts affirmed a policy of banning gay members, after a nearly two-year examination of the issue by a committee of volunteers convened by national leaders of the Boy Scouts of America, known as the BSA.
In a statement last July affirming the ban, its national executive board called it "the best policy for the organization."
But since then, a scouting official said, local chapters have been urging a reconsideration. "We're a grassroots organization. This is a response to what's happening at the local level," the official said.
Two corporate CEOs on BSA's national board, Randall Stephenson of AT&T and James Turley of Ernst & Young, have also said they would work to end the ban. Stephenson is next in line to be the BSA's national chairman. During the 2012 presidential campaign, both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney said the BSA should admit gay scouts and scout leaders.
Jennifer Tyrrell, who was ousted as a den mother for her son's Cub Scout troop because of her sexual orientation, is fighting back. Tyrrell talks to msnbc's Thomas Roberts about her petition to change the Boy Scouts of America's long-standing policy on banning gays and lesbians.
About 50 local United Way groups and several corporations and charities have concluded that the ban violates their non-discrimination requirements and have ceased providing financial aid to the Boy Scouts. An official of The Human Rights Campaign, an advocate for gay rights, said HRC planned to downgrade its non-discrimination ratings for corporations that continue to give the BSA financial support.
"It's an extremely complex issue," said one Boy Scouts of America official, who explained that other organizations have threatened to withdraw their financial support if the BSA drops the ban.
While the national scouting organization sets broad policies, more than 290 local councils nationwide govern the day-to-day conduct of the more than 116,000 local organizations. Individual scouting troops are sponsored by religious and civic organizations that represent a diversity of views on the issue of allowing gay scouts and leaders.
"The beliefs of the sponsoring organizations are highly diverse," the official said.
The policy change now under discussion "would allow the religious, civic or educational organizations that oversee and deliver Scouting to determine how to address this issue," said the BSA's Smith.
"The Boy Scouts would not, under any circumstances, dictate a position to units, members or parents. Under this proposed policy, the BSA would not require any chartered organization to act in ways inconsistent with that organization's mission, principles or religious beliefs," he said.
In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that the Boy Scouts had a First Amendment right of free expression when it came to the organization's belief that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with values stated in the scout oath, requiring scouts to be "morally straight."
The Scouts have won similar legal battles, with courts finding that the BSA's right of free association permits it, as a private organization, to reject those it believes do not conform to is values.
Eagle Scouts return badges to protest policy banning gays
Gay mom upset after dismissal by Boy Scouts


text:
Sean McAdam says they "would like some depth at the corner infield spots or perhaps additional outfield help and could be persuaded to part with Manny Delcarmen or Takashi Saito".
So how can the front office improve the offense? A slightly improved bench would be nice, but that won't help the everyday concerns of the club.
So, for everyone who says, "we need a big bat", which of the nine regulars sits? "Corner infield" would mean Lowell is the odd man out, but the Red Sox, having unwisely signed him to a three-year deal after he was MVP of the 2007 World Series, are on the hook for $12 million with Dr. D. for 2010. And it remains to be seen if the Red Sox will eat his contract so soon after pushing away the plate on Lugo.
The outfield is set. Jason Varitek is not being dealt. And it appears that those well-considered cries to push David Ortiz out of town have quieted. Jed Lowrie is probably the lowest guy on the totem pole, but he's coming back from hand surgery, so the front office won't jettison him before seeing what he can do now that he is healthy.
Grabbing a good hitter -- as if there are a dozen or so milling about out there simply waiting for a call -- sounds good, but actually fitting him into the Red Sox lineup/roster is a bit stickier.
SoSHer DieHardSoxFan1:
Mike Lowell, according to Fangraphs, is 1.2 runs above average at the plate and 8.2 runs below average with the glove. All told, he's .4 wins above replacement. That is not "fine," nor is it merely OK. Stiffs like Jerry Hairston, Mike Fontenot and Kevin Kouzmanoff have had better seasons than Lowell. In fact, the only everyday 3B having a worse season than Lowell is Emilio Bonifacio. And if you don't buy into Lowell's UZR, take a look at Dewan's +/- ratings. The defensive guru says Lowell has made 19 fewer plays than the average 3B.As far as starters, grabbing someone to DH and play 1B -- Aubrey Huff has been mentioned -- and moving Yook to third would make the most sense. But that would mean either putting Lowell on the bench, finding someone to take him off our hands, or DFA-ing him. All three of those options seem unlikely right now.
If you are the Sox, you take a look at your aging, arthritic 3B and realize you need another option. He's barely above replacement level for christ's sake.


text:
Liberty freshman Jess Reinhardt swam a conference-record, NCAA B cut and US Open cut time of 52.87 in the 100 fly at the Ohio State Last Chance Meet, Sunday.
The Liberty swimming team sent seven student-athletes to the Ohio State Last Chance Meet on Sunday. Among Liberty's competitors, Jess Reinhardt improved her qualifying position the most, dropping her seed time in the 100 fly to 52.87. The Last Chance Meet provided swimming student-athletes the opportunity to compete in events in order to earn qualifying times for the 2013 NCAA Division I Swimming & Diving Championships. Swimmers were also attempting to place their seed times in the top 38 nationally, which is how many selections will be made per individual event for nationals this year. Besides Liberty, Louisville, Ohio State, Penn State and Wisconsin were all represented. Reinhardt entered the meet with a lifetime best of 53.18 in the 100 fly. After swimming 53.31 in prelims on Sunday, she clocked a conference-record, NCAA B cut and US Open cut time of 52.87. That time puts her in 32nd in the nation, according to the latest performance list, seemingly solidifying her place in the NCAA Swimming & Diving Championships field. Sophomore Meghan Babcock clocked her lifetime best in the 50 free, swimming 22.81 in prelims, good for an NCAA B cut and US Open cut. She then swam 22.95 in the finals. Babcock later went a personal-best 50.61 during prelims of the 100 free, and swam 50.91 in finals. Freshman Laura Day also registered her personal best, 1:01.26 in the 100 breaststroke prelims. Her time gave her an improved NCAA B cut and US Open cut time. She then swam 1:01.44 later in the afternoon. The quartet of Brye Ravettine, Day, Reinhardt and Babcock swam a program-record 1:40.37 in the 200 medley relay, breaking the previous record of 1:43.68. Brye Ravettine, who entered with a 50 free seed time of 22.78, swam 23.00 in prelims before going 23.34 in the finals. Cori Gary, with a 22.96 seed time, went 23.27 during the prelim session and 23.34 in the finals. Chloe Thomas registered a 23.96 during her heat of the 50. Junior Emilie Kaufman swam 1:02.23 in qualifying for the final of the 100 breaststroke, and then clocked a 1:01.77 in her second swim of the day. Kaufman has now posted an NCAA B cut in the 100 breast six times this season, including a conference-record 1:01.04 last week. Liberty's 200 free relay narrowly missed the NCAA B standard, swimming 1:30.95 and 1:30.97. The team, consisting of Ravettine, Gary, Thomas and Babcock, had swum 1:30.01 at the CCSA Championships. Selections for the 2013 NCAA Division I Women's Swimming & Diving Championships will be announced on Wednesday. The national meet will take place from March 21-23 at IU Natatorium in Indianapolis, Ind.


text:
China National Building Material (HKG:3323) Heffx Trading Outlook
Overall, the bias in prices is: Downwards.
Short term: Prices are moving.
Intermediate term: Prices are ranging.
The projected upper bound is: 3.66.
The projected lower bound is: 3.26.
The projected closing price is: 3.46.
A black body occurred (because prices closed lower than they opened).
During the past 10 bars, there have been 4 white candles and 6 black candles for a net of 2 black candles. During the past 50 bars, there have been 20 white candles and 30 black candles for a net of 10 black candles.
Three black candles occurred in the last three days. Although these candles were not big enough to create three black crows, the steady downward pattern is bearish.
Momentum Indicators
Momentum is a general term used to describe the speed at which prices move over a given time period. Generally, changes in momentum tend to lead to changes in prices. This expert shows the current values of four popular momentum indicators.
Stochastic Oscillator
One method of interpreting the Stochastic Oscillator is looking for overbought areas (above 80) and oversold areas (below 20). The Stochastic Oscillator is 1.0526. This is an oversold reading. However, a signal is not generated until the Oscillator crosses above 20 The last signal was a buy 8 period(s) ago.
Relative Strength Index (RSI)
The RSI shows overbought (above 70) and oversold (below 30) areas. The current value of the RSI is 37.06. This is not a topping or bottoming area. A buy or sell signal is generated when the RSI moves out of an overbought/oversold area. The last signal was a buy 70 period(s) ago.
Commodity Channel Index (CCI)
The CCI shows overbought (above 100) and oversold (below -100) areas. The current value of the CCI is -203.This is an oversold reading. However, a signal isn't generated until the indicator crosses above -100. The last signal was a sell 5 period(s) ago.
The Moving Average Convergence/Divergence indicator (MACD) gives signals when it crosses its 9 period signal line. The last signal was a sell 2 period(s) ago.
Rex Takasugi – TD Profile
CNBM closed down -0.040 at 3.460. Volume was 75% above average (neutral) and Bollinger Bands were 33% narrower than normal.
Open High Low Close Volume___
3.500 3.520 3.460 3.460 36,032,800
Technical Outlook
Short Term: Oversold
Intermediate Term: Bearish
Long Term: Bearish
Moving Averages: 10-period 50-period 200-period
Close: 3.70 3.60 3.67
Volatility: 43 35 43
Volume: 48,037,744 24,146,538 22,561,578
Short-term traders should pay closer attention to buy/sell arrows while intermediate/long-term traders should place greater emphasis on the Bullish or Bearish trend reflected in the lower ribbon.
CNBM is currently 5.8% below its 200-period moving average and is in an downward trend. Volatility is extremely high when compared to the average volatility over the last 10 periods. There is a good possibility that volatility will decrease and prices will stabilize in the near term. Our volume indicators reflect volume flowing into and out of 3323.HK at a relatively equal pace (neutral). Our trend forecasting oscillators are currently bearish on 3323.HK and have had this outlook for the last 1 periods.
Latest posts by HEFFX Australia (see all)
- Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) Battery Day Hints The Event Will Be Groudbreaking - September 18, 2020
- Is Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN) Stock A Buy Right Now? - September 18, 2020
- Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) A Week Of Uncertainty - September 18, 2020


text:
- News
- Business
- Sports
- Entertainment
- Lifestyle
- Health
- Travel
- Technology
1639: The Ursuline Nuns establish a school for girls in Quebec.
1663: 775 French orphan girls and young women are sent to New France under the banner "Filles du Roi" to marry settlers.
1737: Marguerite d'Youville founds the Grey Nuns order in Montreal.
1783: Mohawk Molly Brant was given a house in (now) Kingston, Ontario and pension by the British government for service and loyalty to the Crown during the American Revolution.
1822: Marguerite-Magdelaine Marcot (La Framboise) retired as a wealthy Metis fur trader in Michilimackinac territory in present day Michigan.
1829: Shawnadithit, the last known Beothuk in Newfoundland died of tuberculosis in St. John's.
1850: Women in Ontario got the right to vote for school trustees if they owned property — regardless of marital status.
1852: Susanna Moodie published Roughing it in the Bush about life as a pioneer in then Upper Canada.
1867: Emily Stowe became the first female doctor in Canada, with a practice in Toronto. Her training was from the United States and she did not obtain a Canadian medical licence for another 13 years.
1875: Jenny Trout became the first officially licensed female doctor in Canada, based in Toronto.
1876: Emily Stowe founded the Toronto Women's Literary Club, that was eventually renamed the Dominion Women's Enfranchisement Association.
1908: Lucy Maud Montgomery published Anne of Green Gables.
1910: The National Council of Women go public in favour of suffrage.
1912: Painter Emily Carr travelled to the Queen Charlotte Islands and painted the images that would later make her an honorary member of the Group of Seven.
1916: Between January and April, women in Manitoba won the right to vote in provincial elections followed by women in Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario.
1918: Women over 21 get the right to vote at the federal elections. Women also won the franchise in Nova Scotia.
1919: Women get the right to run for election to the House of Commons, and also get the right to vote in provincial elections in New Brunswick.
1921: Agnes Macphail was the first woman elected to the House of Commons.
1922: Right to vote in P.E.I. elections extended to women.
1925: Women in Newfoundland get the right to vote.
1926: Lela Brooks of Toronto won a speed skating world title at a meet in Saint John, N.B.
1927: The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that women are not "persons" under the law.
1928: In the first Olympic Games that allowed women to compete, Ethel Catherwood won an gold medal in high jump and Canada won gold in the women's 400 meter sprint relay.
1929: The Famous Five appealed their case the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in England and win. Women are declared "persons" under the law and qualify to be appointed to the Senate.
1930: Cairine Wilson appointed to the Senate.
1934: Women in New Brunswick allowed to run for provincial office.
1940: Women in Quebec finally allowed to vote provincially.
1946: 48,000 War brides immigrate to Canada during the decade. Most were British or Europeans who married Canadian servicemen.
1951: Charlotte Whitton became the first female mayor in Canada, running Ottawa for almost 14 years.
1956: Lucille Wheeler won Canada's first Olympic medal for downhill skiing. This year, the federal government also passed the Female Employees Equal Pay Act.
1957: Ellen Fairclough first woman in the federal cabinet.
1967: Royal Commission on the Status of Women launched.
1968: Sandra Palmer is the first Canadian on the Ladies Professional Golf Tour. She won the LPGA Championship tournament that same year. Also this year, Henry Morgentaler began performing illegal abortions at his private clinic in Montreal.
1970: Report of the Royal Commission of the Status of Women is tabled.
1971: The first federal minister responsible for the status of women is appointed. Robert Andras is the first of seven men appointed to the position.
1972: Rosemary Brown became the first black women elected to provincial office in Canada. She was an MLA in B.C. for 14 years. Also, Monique Begin was elected to House of Commons from Quebec and Pauline McGibbon was appointed Lieutenant-governor in Ontario, the first for any province.
1975: Rosemary Brown was the first woman to run for the leadership of a federal party, losing the NDP leadership to Ed Broadbent on the fourth ballot.
1979: Bouctouche New Brunswick author Antonine Maillet won the prestigious French prize the Prix Goncourt for Pelagie la Charette.
1982: Bertha Wilson appointed to the Supreme Court.
1984: Daurene Lewis became the first black woman mayor in North America as mayor of Annapolis Royal N.S. Also this year, Jeanne Sauve was appointed governor-general.
1986: The federal employment equity Act is passed.
1987: Lucille Johstone appointed CEO of Rivtow, B.C.'s second largest towboat company. She started with the company in 1945 as a "girl Friday".
1988: The Supreme Court struck down all legal restrictions to abortion in Canada.
1989: Audrey McLaughlin won leadership of the federal NDP. Also this year, the Canadian Armed Forces allowed women to serve in almost all occupations, including infantry and fighter jets. And in Montreal, Marc Lepine killed 14 women at L'Ecole Polytechnique because he wanted to hurt feminists.
1991: Rita Johnson became the first female provincial premier, running B.C. for a few months. In N.W.T., Nellie J. Cournoyea became the first native woman to lead a provincial or territorial government.
1992: Roberta Bondar flew in the Space Shuttle Discovery
1993: Conservative Kim Campbell becomes the first female prime minister, for about four months. In P.E.I., Catherine Callbeck is elected premier. Also this year, Karla Homolka is sentenced to 12 years in prison for manslaughter in the murder of two teenage girls in southern Ontario. The controversial plea bargain is the only way she agreed to testify against her then husband, Paul Bernardo.
1994: Mary Simon appointed Ambassador for Circumpolar Affairs.
1995: A Supreme Court ruling deemed child support payments were taxable income.
1997: Martha Billes acquired majority control of Canadian Tire from her brothers, who wanted to sell.
2000: Beverley McLachlin appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
2006: Capt. Nichola Goddard is killed in battle against the Taliban in Afghanistan.
2007: Robert "Willie" Pickton is convicted of murdering six women, mostly prostitutes and drug users, from Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. He claimed to have murdered 49 women.
2010: Kathy Dunderdale was sworn in as the first female premier of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Compiled by Kirsten J. Smith,
Postmedia News
Sources: Canadian Encyclopedia Online; Library and Archives of Canada; Dictionary of Canadian Biography; Status of Women Canada; Canadian Human Rights Commission; www.famouscanadianwomen.com/famous%20firsts/politicians%20and%20public%20servants.htm; http://canadaonline.about.com/od/womeningovernment/a/firstswomengov.htm; http://www.famouscanadianwomen.com


text: (from the publisher)One is wanted for a murder she didn't commit. The other is on the run because she knows too much. They are Dinah Laurel Lance and Ev Crawford - a.k.a. Black Canary and Starling - and together, as Gotham City's covert ops team, they're taking down the villains other heroes can't touch. But now they've attracted the attention of a grizzled newspaper reporter who wants to expose them, as well as a creepy, chameleon-like strike team that's out to kill them.Don't miss the start of this hard-hitting new series from mystery novelist/comics writer Duane Swierczynski (Expiration Date, Cable).


text:
It's the season to celebrate, and we have more truly original ways than ever to send a smile! From colorful summer flowers for decorating, to gifts & gourmet foods for sharing, to picnic recipes, summer party ideas and more, you'll find everything you need to connect with the important people in your life.
$49.99 - $69.99
$49.99 - $59.99
$59.99 - $79.99
$49.99 - $99.99


text:
My baby boy turns two today.
We went to buy his cake today and he, completely unprompted thanked the staff. In the supermarket he now walks with me, for quick shops only (rather than sitting in the trolley or pram) and natters the whole way; busses, music, birds, cars. He scoots straight past all the dolls and pink crafts and goes straight to monster trucks, robots and aeroplanes. He knows to hold my hand at all times. When we got home he refused to let me cook dinner and swung from my leg until I carried him whilst cooking so that he could stir. After dinner he told me that wanted cuddles with mumma and whimpered until I sat down with him and he hurriedly made conversation, becoming breathless in fact…just in case I would get up and move away from talking about favourite vehicles, animals, planets or dinosaurs.
He still feels a part of me, an extension. Not everyone will see this. I have learned an incredible amount about life through my boy in the last two years.
I eat more popcorn now than I have for many years, because he likes it. I used to be a definite salted girl, but somewhere along the lines, things changed. Apart from when it comes to masala popcorn, of course!
For this recipe I have used jaggery. Jaggery is a molasses like block, deep and smooth and is a product of date, cane juice or palm sap without the separation of molasses and crystals and can vary from light to dark brown in colour. Jaggery is typically combined with other ingredients such as nuts, coconut or condensed milk to make sweet delicacies. I am using jaggery because it has got to be better than using caramel and also, because I love the deep tones of jaggery. I know that jaggery has been used for Ayurveda as it contains minerals that aren't found in sugar. I had added sesame seeds and peanuts, which make the popcorn taste quite festive when combined with jaggery. There is an aromatic hint of cardamom and a kick of heat. Give it a go.
Please be careful, melted jaggery is very hot and can burn you. Please don't lick it for a taste test when hot.
175g jaggery
3 tbsp. toasted sesame seeds
75g toasted and coarsely chopped pistachio
1/3rd cup of popcorn kernels
1 tbsp. vegetable oil
¼ tsp. cardamom
¼ tsp. chilli powder
- Start by making the popcorn. Heat the oil in a non-stick pan and allow the popcorn kernels to pop and then cool the popcorn
- Heat the jaggery on a medium to low flame in a non-stick pan. Be patient and let the jaggery melt. Cut it into smaller pieces to speed it up.
- Once the jaggery is smooth, turn the heat to a very low flicker and quickly stir in the spices, blending them through evenly. Turn off the heat and let the jaggery cool until it is warm, but not piping hot.
- Add the sesame seeds and pistachio and then the popcorn and stir quickly before it sets into clumps. Try and get an even coverage.
- Tip the popcorn out onto a large plate, letting it cool.
- When the popcorn is cool separate any clumps.


text:
|Version 1 (modified by rme, 13 years ago) (diff)
You can use Subversion to track the OpenMCL sources.
First, check out an initial copy.
$ svn co http://svn.clozure.com/publicsvn/openmcl/trunk/ccl A ccl/l1-fasls A ccl/l1-fasls/.cvsignore A ccl/LICENSE A ccl/cocoa-ide A ccl/cocoa-ide/processes-window.lisp A ccl/cocoa-ide/hemlock A ccl/cocoa-ide/hemlock/hemlock11.cursor A ccl/cocoa-ide/hemlock/website A ccl/cocoa-ide/hemlock/website/index.html.in . . . A ccl/examples/addressbook.lisp A ccl/examples/gtk-minesweeper.lisp A ccl/examples/.cvsignore U ccl Checked out revision 7568. $
You need a lisp kernel and a heap image so you can compile the sources. Grab the most recent snapshot tarball from ftp://clozure.com/pub/testing/ and unpack it somewhere. Copy the lisp kernel and the heap image (dx86cl64 and dx86cl64.image if you're running x86-64 Leopard) over to where you just checked out the sources.
Next, copy over the interface databases from the snapshots. Just copy the .cdb files.
For example, on an x86-64 Leopard system, you'd do something like this:
$ cd /path/to/snapshot/ccl $ cp darwin-x86-headers64/libc/*.cdb /path/to/svn/ccl/darwin-x86-headers/libc
See UpdatingFromSource for information on how to get the x86-64 interface files for Cocoa.
Go back to your sources that you checked out with Subversion, and rebuild the lisp. Again, on x86-64 Leopard:
$ ./dx86cl64 Welcome to OpenMCL Version 1.1-r7527M (DarwinX8664)! (or whatever) ? (rebuild-ccl :force t)
There might be some compiler warnings, and if there's a CERROR, it should be safe to continue from it.
Now you've got an up-to-date OpenMCL. Whever you want, tell Subversion to update the sources.
$ svn update U some-file.lisp Updated to revision xxxx.
After updating, rebuild the lisp as outlined above.
See also: UpdatingFromSource


text:
Discuss this interview in the Community & Society forum of Post &
Previously in Books & Authors:
In the Very Middle of Things (April 1998)
In his new book, Calamities of Exile, Lawrence Weschler's explorations lead him to some very strange -- and familiar -- places.
The Next Left (April 1998)
Richard Rorty, the eminent philosopher and author of Achieving Our Country, argues that the American Left, if it is to recapture its relevance, must take pride in its past.
All for One, One for All (April 1998)
Can science call the postmodernist bluff? Edward O. Wilson, the author of Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge, says it can -- and must.
Inheriting Slavery (February 1998)
Edward Ball, the author of Slaves in the Family, set out to reckon with the legacy of his ancestors' plantations.
More Books & Authors interviews in Atlantic Unbound.
Now, with the American publication of Seeing a Color-Blind Future: The Paradox of Race, Williams's lectures have made a timely landing on native ground. The term "color-blind" is everywhere in the air -- bandied back and forth in debates over "color-consciousness" in public life -- nowhere more so than on the racial battlegrounds of California, Texas, Washington state, and elsewhere in the country where war is being waged against affirmative action. Though her book does not deal overtly with affirmative action (primarily because, as Williams points out, Britain does not have programs like those in the United States), Williams makes no secret of how she feels about current trends. "In the context of today's ghettos, inner cities, and those places doomed to be called the Third World," she writes in the first lecture, "I hear the word triage. I worry about this image that casts aside so many so easily. It envisions poor and dying populations as separate, distant, severable." She continues, "I fear triage; I fear that one cannot cut off a third of the world without some awful, life-threatening bleeding in the rest of the body politic."
Williams, a professor of law at Columbia University, is the author of two previous books, The Alchemy of Race and Rights (1991) and The Rooster's Egg: On the Persistence of Prejudice (1995), both published by Harvard University Press. A contributing editor and a columnist for The Nation, Williams is also a frequent commentator on National Public Radio and has written for many publications, among them The New York Times, The New Yorker, Ms., The Village Voice, Civilization, and others. She spoke recently with Atlantic Unbound's Wen Stephenson.
Can you explain your book's title? Do you see yourself as entering self-consciously into current debates over the achievability, even desirability, of a "color-blind" society? The book doesn't mention affirmative action explicitly.
Yes, all of this intersects with specific legal remedies such as affirmative action, and the counter to those, which has been appeals to color-blindness -- not just color-blindness as a social ideal but as a kind of literal mandate that seems to be requiring, as in California's Proposition 209, that you eliminate all reference to race even when you're trying to remediate the effects of racism. That's the paradox, it seems to me -- that you can't talk about what it is that you're trying to remediate. Therefore you can't talk about it sensibly. In the book I use the image of the three monkeys, Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil. To me, that image represents the wrong kind of color-blindness, because that's just plain blindness, rather than unselfconsciousness about race or about the mark of color.
"While I do want to underscore that I embrace color-blindness as a legitimate hope for the future, I worry that we tend to enshrine the notion with a kind of utopianism whose näiveté will ensure its elusiveness. In the material world ranging from playgrounds to politics, our ideals perhaps need more thoughtful, albeit more complicated, guardianship."
--Patricia Williams. From Seeing a Color-Blind Future: The Paradox of Race.
The book opens with an anecdote about your son's being misdiagnosed as (literally) color-blind. The well-meaning teachers in his nursery school had taught the children that "it makes no difference" what color you are, and it seems your son took this quite literally, so that he resisted identifying color at all. The story illustrates the way children are taught that race doesn't matter. But you're pointing out the many ways in which the color of one's skin does, unfortunately, matter. How do you explain to a child the idea that race matters?
Well, you know, I think there is no rational way to explain it. That's the great injury of race -- it is not rational. It does matter, and yet it shouldn't. And yet it does.
When I had my son's vision tested, the doctor told me that he was indeed not color-blind. It was his teachers who had said he was having trouble distinguishing colors in various color games and tests, and that he was so smart in other regards that I should really see if he were color-blind. It turned out that he was saying it doesn't matter what color the grass is, it doesn't matter what color the sky is.
It is one thing to teach children from the inception that race does not matter, that skin color does not matter. And yet my son's teachers had made this point of its not making a difference only after it had made a difference. They ignored the racial dynamics of the classroom up to a certain point, but when some children excluded my son from their play because of his race the teachers said color doesn't make a difference. His believing that literally was his attempt to resolve something that was nonsensical, basically -- something that was two things at once.
Related feature:
Race in America (November 1997)
If there is a race problem in America today, what is it? An Atlantic Unbound Roundtable featuring Glenn C. Loury, Christopher Edley Jr., Dinesh D'Souza, and Nicholas Lemann.
I have not found a sensible way to talk about race to my son. I do not want to poison him with the kinds of demarcations that would most effectively explain what racism is. Racism means that certain people don't like you. I guess my concern is that most children, black children in particular, understand the negative consequences of race before they have words to understand the great complexity of what's embodied in its history. It's a little bit like wondering how you explain war to a child.
You're known for the use of anecdote in your writing. In fact, you manage to write about pressing legal and philosophical issues from a position that's very much "on the ground." What draws you, as a writer and as a legal scholar, to anecdote? Are there any dangers inherent in the use of anecdote?
Surely. I sometimes get characterized as somebody who does nothing but anecdote. And that's absolutely not true. Part of what I've tried to do in my writing is insert anecdote at the moments when people have reasoned their way by virtue of broad generalizations. I insert an anecdote to bring it down to the individual level -- to make it nuanced, to make it real. That's where I think it's most effective.
On the other hand, I've been in situations where everybody's saying, "I am a representative of this," "I am a representative of this." It's as though they can't get past their own little anecdotal stories of self-validation and self-credentialization. That's the point at which I will reverse it and reach for the broad statistic. I find, for example, that people use the worst-case scenario when talking about welfare reform. It's always, you know, a black teenage mother who's thirteen, has six children, and whose boyfriend is a crack dealer. Broad public policies are made with her as the representative figure. That's anecdote. Willie Horton is anecdote. And that's the point at which I think it's useful to say that in 1996 only two percent of single mothers on welfare were under the age of eighteen -- and only eight percent when you count those who were eighteen and nineteen. It helps to put things in proportion. So I try to use anecdote consistently to illustrate larger points. I use it strategically.
You've written very critically about the images of Africa conveyed by the American media. What did you think of President Clinton's recent trip to Africa and the way it was covered?
Some people have worried that this visit will introduce a new, American kind of corporate colonialism in Africa. That said, I do think it is extremely significant that Clinton is the first American President to have visited the continent in such an extensive way -- or at all. That is an unqualified good. I hope it helps. I thought it brought a somewhat more complex visual image of Africa to the American public. It gave a sense of Africa as a series of governments rather than as an unpeopled or undivided continental landscape, ripe for extraction of resources. It showed that there is enormous cultural diversity, enormous linguistic diversity. For once, the only leader beating a drum was Clinton himself.
In other words, Africa is not just chaos. There are plenty of functioning states.
Because Africa is covered so marginally in the United States, I think that a significant part of the American public actually believes that there is nothing but chaos from one end of the African continent to the other -- little ability for government, for self-representation, for coherence. And I do think that even Clinton's trip was covered marginally: I will not get over the picture in The New York Times with President Clinton and his wife standing in the Door of No Return, at Gorée Island. They're standing there, and the caption is to the effect that they're holding hands, and it's obviously a photo-op for how close they are in the wake of the Monica Lewinsky scandal. So Africa was a backdrop for more commentary on Clinton's sex life.
But even given all that, I thought it was an improvement. I think it was about time an American President went to Africa and treated it as part of the diplomatic community -- went as a head of state and was welcomed by other heads of state.
From The Atlantic:
"The Conservative Line on Race," by Glenn C. Loury (November 1997)
In America in Black and White, a book uniting social science with ideological argument, the authors contend that African-Americans should rejoice in the progress they have made since the 1960s, stop playing "the race card," and renounce the other articles of racial liberalism.
"My Race Problem -- and Ours," by Randall Kennedy (May 1997)
A consideration of touchy matters -- racial pride, racial solidarity, and racial loyalty -- rarely discussed.
"Whatever Happened to Integration?" by Gerald Early (February 1997)
"In short, the liberal believes that whites are the problem, the conservative that blacks are the problem. Any thinking black person must sit between these contesting categorizations, which have existed since antebellum days, feeling something between bemusement and contempt."
On affirmative action:
"Reverse Racism, or How the Pot Got to Call the Kettle Black," by Stanley Fish (November 1993)
In America "whites once set themselves apart from blacks and claimed privileges for themselves while denying them to others," the author writes. "Now, on the basis of race, blacks are claiming special status and reserving for themselves privileges they deny to others. Isn't one as bad as the other? The answer is no." A distinguished professor confronts the objections to affirmative action and offers a spirited rebuttal.
"A Question of Fairness," by Juan Williams (February 1987)
Clarence Thomas, a black, and the chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, does not believe in integration, affirmative action, or the possibility of a colorblind society. His job, he believes, is to protect individuals, not groups.
"The Issue Before the Court: Who Gets Ahead in America?" by McGeorge Bundy (November 1977)
The case before the court: The Regents of the University of California v. Allan Bakke. The essence of it comes down to one perplexing question: Should we reduce opportunity for some whites, in some ways, in order to enhance opportunity for some blacks and other victims of long-standing discrimination?
More Atlantic articles on race.
In the new book you write that "in a society as relentlessly bombarded with visual images as ours" mere conversation about race isn't enough, and that "we need to pull together a comprehensive analysis of words and images, in both high and low culture." Do you think there's any danger that a relentless focus on the media distracts attention from what's happening in our neighborhoods, in our schools, in our legislatures? Does it tend to deflect political discourse away from actual policy?
I think the media is such an important filter for everything. Television cameras and commentators are everywhere. We're losing all sense of boundary between what goes on in a courtroom or in Congress and what goes on in the minds of an editorial team. Civic participation is enormously filtered by the media. My reference in the book was not just to visual images but also to the intervention of those who own the media, some of whom are pumping huge amounts of money into certain propagandistic ventures. The Manhattan Institute has enough money and power to send books and position papers to every judge in the United States, to every editorial board in the United States, and in an era of downsizing even in editorial rooms, this provides the terms of debate rather too conveniently, and a kind of reliance upon it becomes significant.
I also think that there's an absolute necessity for people to be more educated about why black people are offended by this or that image -- the images of buffoons, of blackface, for example -- and why somebody gets upset when Ted Danson did what he did, why blacks are upset by what so many white people dismiss as mere political correctness, why certain words wound some people. That seems to me part of a conversation that involves the media but is also a civic conversation. So I do think the media is one of the most important participants in that conversation, but no, I don't propose media criticism as a substitute for policy debate.
I used to do a lot of court-watching. I would actually sit and watch an entire trial that the media was also covering, and then would compare what actually went on in the courtroom with how it was covered. I'm fascinated, for example, by the way in which trial participants are no longer just playing to the jury -- they're playing to the media. So the prosecution will go precisely until four o'clock in the afternoon, and then rest, so that now the defense has to come up and preach to an empty courtroom because all the media has run off to make their deadlines.
There are many levels to what I mean by media education. I think it's up to all of us, right and left, to keep one another honest.
You've written about representations of class and class-bias in the media. For example, in The Rooster's Egg you tell how you began "to listen much more closely for insulting and dehumanized depictions of poor whites in the mainstream media, even those too 'respectable' to use overt markers like 'white trash.'" And yet, ironically, as you point out, "in spite of an arguably shared experience, blacks and poor whites end up on opposite sides of a left-right divide." This seems to be one of our greatest dilemmas. That is, how can we overcome the very real effects of racism on the one hand and of deep-seated class-bias on the other?
There's a historic pattern of divisiveness among groups. Some would say that it's cynically cultured by politicians who want to remain in power, but there is a kind of economic ethos to it as well -- the pie is too small, and you've got to fight for your group or fight for yourself. But the poor-white division is one that has a very specific history going back to pre-slavery days, and especially just post-Civil War. If you look at something like the D. W. Griffith movie Birth of a Nation, you see poor whites, whose lot was little better than the recently freed blacks, being drawn into a sense of self and a sense of political power based on race -- which, in its most cynical form was a way of keeping the plantation and the class system in its place.
There was a piece in The New York Times recently about a revival of Old South values -- not the slavery, of course, but chivalry and the whole thing. It does strike me that what we're seeing is a revival of not just chivalry, and not just the manners, but also of this kind of class consciousness. We went through a period, perhaps beginning in the thirties with The Grapes of Wrath, of getting over at least some of the revulsion and stereotypes -- of giving poor whites a dignity. But we seem to be going backwards recently, with descriptions of figures like Tonya Harding. Around the time of her notoriety, one began to see a re-emergence of the term "trailer trash," with no quotes around it, used in so-called respectable publications.
Do you see a possibility for a kind of populist politics that somehow transcends race?
I do think that the movements that have most effectively advanced populist coalitions have been the labor movements -- and there's been a great deal of money dedicated to breaking those movements apart. People who get paid decently and who have a chance at decent housing are quite frankly much more pacific than those who don't. The attempt to break apart every single union, including teachers unions, seems to be a self-defeating strategy. It's like what happened when Californians, with Proposition 13, made war upon the use of tax dollars for the common good. The California schools have gone from being some of the best in the nation to among the worst. And this hasn't just affected minorities. It has meant that white kids have a higher suicide rate, are more self-destructive, are less educated. This is well documented.
So I guess my concern is that we suffer from not just racial divisions, not just class divisions, but that we in this country seem to have let the whole notion of a common good, of a public space, in which we can all exist, fall into terrible disrepair, and that we've allowed even the notion of equality to become some kind of cipher for the greediness of one group getting a preference at the expense of others.
In a recent report on NPR about the persistence of de facto racial segregation in suburbs south of Chicago, one African-American woman who had won a housing-discrimination suit said that "no amount of lawsuits" would ever change the deep-seated prejudices of some white communities. You write of your own experience with discrimination in the real-estate market where you bought your home. How would you respond to that woman who, despite winning her lawsuit, decided not to move her family into that neighborhood but instead found a house on the other side of Interstate 57, in a predominantly black neighborhood?
Well, it's important to win suits. It's important to get a result. As far as actually moving into the neighborhood, it's in some ways the same question as, What do I tell my child? It's a horrible catch-22. What is there to be said? How can you explain this rationally? What's going to make sense of an impossible situation? Do you tell somebody to move into what is, effectively, if not a war zone then a kind of battleground, to prove a point? Or do you tell her to move into a segregated community where she will feel "more comfortable," but that usually will suffer from some lack of political clout or a host of resource-related problems? Where can you feel most at home while waging this ongoing battle for acceptance and integration? Historically, a lot of black people have made the tremendous effort to move into white neighborhoods to wage this battle and to prove that they still believe in integration.
I think as long as she's fighting, suing, pushing for an end to the divide, not retreating into utter resignation, then I'm not troubled by her decision to move into the black neighborhood. I would invite the white communities to feel her loss as a neighbor, and encourage those who feel her pain to move across I-57 to join her, to be good white neighbors in a mostly black neighborhood. That's one thing I would love to see more of. How can any of us exist when there's a perception that the white neighborhood is over here and the black neighborhood is over here? How do you straddle fences? You end up on the railroad tracks, you end up in the middle of the Interstate, you end up getting squashed somehow. It's hard; it's hard. We need creative crossover.
Speaking about the pitfalls of "racial voyeurism," you cite the specific example of black churches in Harlem that are overrun by foreign tour groups on any given Sunday morning. Sometimes, however, it can be difficult to tell the difference between the voyeur and the person who sincerely seeks some kind of human connection across a cultural divide. Assuming there are such sincere people, is that kind of seeking for connection worthwhile?
I think it's worthwhile. I also think that seeking connection with "others" is not just an issue of tourism in the literal sense. I think that it is also sometimes a kind of projection, a sort of finding of the wild side of oneself, or a seeking of forgiveness. I can't tell you how many white people come to me and say, "I apologize for the misdeeds of all white people." Please don't. Please don't. I'm not going to apologize for the misdeeds of all black people. And I do sometimes think that that seeking for communion takes on a kind of hackneyed, self-righteous overtone to it -- "I am your brother," that sort of thing. It can be extremely annoying. Nevertheless, the project of seeking connection is essential. And we ought to forgive each other for our transgressions in this regard, to a certain extent.
I think there's a moment when another kind of seeking can occur. Frequently there is the person who says, "Oh, that's just politically correct, because actually I love black music, I've gone to black churches." In other words, it gets used as a surrogate for the real kind of difficult conversation, which is one where you've got to listen to what you don't want to hear, not just pick and choose the gospel music that you love, not just pick and choose the food or the taste or the look that you really like.
So I shouldn't feel proud of myself for listening to John Coltrane and John Lee Hooker?
Right. You've got great taste, but it's not the same as wrestling with the politics.
Writing about the repercussions of slavery in the title essay of The Rooster's Egg, you remarked that "1856 is not very long ago at all." Yet at the outset of the new book you say, "I don't mean to suggest that we need always go about feeling guilty or responsible or perpetually burdened by original sin or notions of political correctness." How are we to define our relationship to the past?
We need a very careful examination of exactly how this history has affected us. Sometimes I think it's rather too easily done by creating almost iconic figures, such as Martin Luther King and Harriet Tubman. And certainly they deserve to be icons, but icons can become meaningless. They're false gods. We have a limited repertoire, a limited pantheon, of such images with which to discuss race, and once you get beyond that repertoire the discussion lapses into guilt (I have heard guilt described as a wasted emotion, and I tend to agree) or feelings of responsibility, as I mentioned earlier, when somebody says I apologize on behalf of all white people for the great history of suffering of your people. And then I get surly and refuse to apologize for Louis Farrakhan one more time. I mean I have -- I do -- but at some point, just as whites don't want to be burdened as the descendants of all slave masters, I don't want to be burdened for every demagogue. And so, therefore, I'm distinguishing that impulse to apologize, which I think is sort of empty and gets us nowhere, from really looking at the way in which we are affected as members of these groups by these histories -- by the way in which we communicate based on habits of thought. And that's all we can be responsible for. Yet that's a lot.
There's an enormous history of violence -- legalized violence -- and there's an enormous history of not speaking about that violence. I think I mentioned in The Rooster's Egg an image brought to me by a friend of mine who teaches psychology at Harvard Medical School. It's a picture of a lynching from around the turn of the century -- the whole white town has turned out to watch the lynching -- and in the foreground is a little white girl with a doll that has a noose around its neck. It's this quiet image of incredible barbarity transposed to the young. John Singleton's film Rosewood has another very affecting image, of a little white boy being trained to tie a noose -- you know, you have to do thirteen knots around it in order to make a good noose.
But if that's all we talk about, how do we find a balance between acknowledging the wrongs of history and their repercussions and yet still finding inspiration in the achievements and progress of the past?
I'm not saying that I think that's all we have to talk about. But I don't think we've begun to talk about it -- about how hard it is. And it's going to get much harder. I mean, the literal definition of trauma is that which cannot be spoken. The psychoanalytic definition of trauma is either that which you cannot speak because it happens to you at an age before you have words to understand it, or that which knocks the words out of you, because it's so brutal. And therefore you act it out over and over again. I am impressed by the fact that the moment we get close to some of the history of violence around this subject, we say, "But we need something inspirational, let's turn to..." This is an American tradition. We're optimists, we want a happy ending, we want the movie to come out right -- but I think an optimistic ending is our ability to live with our mourning a little bit. I have a friend, a historian, who offered a course called "Mourning in America" --
Wow. That's quite a title. I mean, the ironic reference to Reagan...
Does it strike a chord? The class was completely overwhelmed with students. The moment I say that title it immediately strikes this chord. And that's what I mean -- that we don't have words for what's really at stake, that we need to look at how we have not mourned so much of what's happened here.
Read an excerpt from Seeing a Color-Blind Future: The Paradox of Race, by Patricia Williams.
Discuss this interview in the Community & Society forum of Post & Riposte.
More Books & Authors interviews in Atlantic Unbound.
Wen Stephenson is editorial director of The Atlantic Monthly's New Media department. He has written the In Media Res column for Atlantic Unbound.
Copyright © 1998 by The Atlantic Monthly Company. All rights reserved.
Williams photograph © Gasper Tringale.


text:
Made from regular timber grade, planks are uniform, with small variations in grain and tone.
These floors are characterized by subtle variations in colour, tone and pattern and are without knots.
Featuring dramatic graining, gnarls and knots, these floors boast greater colour variations and have a more lively, rustic character.


text:
She is the epitome of true grit, all packaged in a gentle feminine form. A scientist par excellence, a double Nobel Prize winner, a pioneer on many fronts and an exemplary human being, Madame Marie Curie showed how much a human can endure and still succeed! Today is her birthday and Google duly honours her with a doodle.
The doodle is a simple image of Curie holding up a flask with a fixed chemical apparatus on the table in front of her. Her work, involving the extraction of minute quantities of radium and polonium from uranium ores, must have involved more complicated apparatus setups. Click on the doodle and you'll be redirected to a page returning the search results to her name. The doodle is a simple one, a humble offering of respect, just like Marie Curie might have wanted to be.
Her Life
Born in Poland on this day in 1867, she was the fifth and youngest child. Tragedies in her life started early, when she lost her mother at an early age, followed by her elder sister. Jolted twice, she renounced her faith (Catholicism) and became agnostic. Her academic pursuits would take her to Sorbonne; there she would obtain a degree in math. She would also start working with magnetism, which would eventually prove a great source of attraction between her (then Marie Sklodowska) and her future husband Pierre Curie.
The Physics and Chemistry that she did
The physics world was rocked by the discovery of unknown rays given off by certain substances in the late 1890's. It was Becquerel's seminal discovery of radioactivity that set Marie and Pierre on a hunt for a new element radium! Nothing was known about radioactivity not even the harm that it does.
From a ton of pitch blende (Uranium dioxide – ore from which Uranium is extracted), less than one-tenth of a gram of radium chloride was extracted. This was 1898. Polonium, discovered by the Curies in the previous year, was easier to extract. Both were much more radioactive than Uranium. Madame Curie wrote a characteristically tepid sentence, which was immensely insightful:
The fact is very remarkable, and leads to the belief that these minerals may contain an element which is much more active than uranium.
Becquerel was her doctoral advisor; she obtained her DSc from the University of Paris in 1903. In the same year, she received her first Nobel Prize – in Physics and with Pierre Curie and Henri Becquerel.
Her struggle restarted in 1906 with the death of her husband. She continued her work, but failed to get a position at the University of Paris, just because women were disallowed from such a position. She was, however, received with honour at Sorbonne, the first woman to hold the post of a professor.
She was attacked by her detractors and there were many when news about her alleged affair with Paul Langevin surfaced in 1910-11. In 1911, she received her second Nobel Prize this time in Chemistry and alone!
She would die in 1936 due to the very radiation that made her a celebrity. She campaigned widely for more funding for radium research. She founded the Curie Institute, which produced more Nobel Laureates, including her daughter Irene Joliet-Curie and son-in law Frederic Joliot-Curie.
Madame Marie Curie is a symbol today, a reminder that science is not merely a great idea occurring inside the head of a genius. It's a body of knowledge, requiring immense dedication, sometimes even courage, to acquire.
Madame Marie Curie, on your birthday, we salute you!


text:
2009 undoubtedly has been the year when the 'crowd' really came into its own. As the year drew to a close, it seemed like it might be a fun (okay, also possibly foolish) idea to attempt to create the world's first crowd-curated holiday playlist.
Whilst I'd tinkered with this in fairly samizdat fashion at the end of November, the idea properly came to life when Maria Popova (@brainpicker) – the undisputed queen of online cultural curation and author of, amongst other things, Brain Pickings – got in touch. She suggested we create an audio tumblr together and see if we could find 31 people to curate one, great, vaguely seasonal track for every day in December.
So far, 24 days and around a 1000 plays later, it's a fairly diverse collection of music and commentary: by turns happy, nostalgic, darkly funny, triumphant, moving, warm, sad and – if you ask us – all of it pretty downright wonderful.
We hope people have had as much fun as we have getting involved and watching it unfold. Maria and I will say thank you properly to everyone when the project completes at the end of the month, but in the meantime please keep checking out the site, listen to the smorgasbord of tracks we've had in so far and read what the curators have had to say about the music they've chosen. For more about Taped Together, check it out here.
The full and final playlist will be made available as a download to anyone who'd like one, please check out the site for details at the end of this month.
Happy Christmas and Happy Holidays Everyone.


text:
Archive for November, 2007
Delete cache in Safari 3
Question: How do I empty the cache in Safari 3?
Answer: You can empty the cache and temp files in Safari 3 by doing the following:
1) Open Safari
2) In the menu bar, click on 'Edit' and in the drop down menu, click on 'Empty Cache'
3) In the pop up dialog, click 'Empty'.
Or you can press 'Ctrl + Alt + E'
Google Reader Keyboard shortcuts
Google Reader is an fantastic RSS reader. It is easy to use and has some amazing features. But have you discovered that there are over 20 keyboard short-cuts that will enhance your Google reader experience? I don't think so! Here are 27 great keyboard short-cuts.
|Acting on items
|next/previous item
|star item
|next item or page
|<Shift> + s:
|share item
|<Shift> + space:
|previous item or page
|view original
|item scan down/up (list only)
|tag item
|<Shift> + n/p:
|next/previous subscription
|mark item as read/unread
|<Shift> + x:
|expand folder
|expand/collapse item (list only)
|<Shift> + o:
|open subscription or folder
|<Shift> + a:
|mark all as read
|email item
|g then h:
|go home
|g then a:
|go to all items
|toggle full screen mode
|g then s:
|go to starred items
|switch to expanded view
|g then <Shift> + s:
|go to shared items
|switch to list view
|g then u:
|open subscription selector
|move cursor to search box
|g then t:
|open tag selector
|g then <Shift> + t:
|open trends page
Looking for a contributor
I am looking for a contributor to write for Tech Help Videos. Expanding Tech Help Videos and providing more tips can not be done just by myself, I need a helper. So if you are interested, please email me at via Contact form or leave a comment with your name and website or blog address.
Block Animated Ads in Internet Explorer 7
Question: How do I disable or block animated ads in Internet Explorer 7?
Answer: You can block animated ads in Internet Explorer 7 by doing th followiung:
1) Open Internet Explorer and click on 'Tools'
2) In the drop down menu, click 'Internet Options'
3) In the pop up window, select the 'Advanced' tab
4) In the Settings scroll down menu, go to the Multimedia heading and then untick 'Play Animations in webpages'.
5) Click 'Apply' and then 'OK'. Then restart Internet Explorer 7 for the change to take effect.
Pagerank 8! I'm over the moon!
How good can this get? I am smiling and laughing while writing this post. The Google Pagerank checker on my Google Toolbar read 8! I can't believe it and I have never dreamed of this happening, especially when a lot of famous blog's PR are decreasing. If you don't believe me, then take a look at the screenshot below. I also want to note that this blog is just 4 months old and previously.
My Pagerank may change again and go back to 5 but it is nice to capture the best moment!
Related articles
My Google Pagerank is 5. I'm beating top bloggers!
How I got a Google Pagerank 5 in 3 months
Create a Search Folder
Question: I want to have some searches saved so that the search will operate more faster. And how do I create a search folder?
Answer: You can find files faster by saving your most common searches. (This tip is for Vista users)
1) Go to the Index Search Explorer in Windows Vista by clicking 'Start'.
2) Create a search by typing your query in the search box at the bottom of the Start Menu. As you type, files from a variety of locations on your PC appear that match your text.
3) Once the search is completed, on the toolbar click 'Save Search'.
4) In the File name box, type a name for the search, and then click 'Save'. The search is saved in the Searches folders, which you can open by clicking the Searches link in the Navigation pane.
Introducing 'Screenshot Gallery'
I will be introducing a new category in Tech Help Videos called 'Screenshot Gallery'. What it basically is a gallery of screenshots of a particular software or web service. Most likely, there will be a brief summary of the particular software and web service.
About one month ago, I introduced 'Companion Guides' which are aim to help you understand certain parts of technology and computing. I have had a huge success with that and have received many emails telling me how useful it was.
Here is a Companion Guide about Internet Security
- Security Guide Series: Intro – The risks and dangers
- Security Guide Series: How to protect your PC
- Security Suite Comparison
- Extra Protection and Freebies
Also, you may wish to email suggestions and topics on what I should written about.