text:
BOBC Bonner Online-Bibliographie zur Comicforschung
Duncan, Randy, Michael Ray Taylor und David Stoddard: Creating Comics as Journalism, Memoir and Nonfiction. London, New York: Routledge, 2016. (260 S.)
Added by: joachim (09 Jun 2018 00:53:51 Europe/Berlin)
|Resource type: Book
Languages: englisch
ID no. (ISBN etc.): 9780415730075
BibTeX citation key: Duncan2016
Email resource to friend
View all bibliographic details
|Categories: General
Keywords: Anleitung, Autobiographie, Reportagecomics, Sachcomics
Creators: Duncan, Stoddard, Taylor
Publisher: Routledge (London, New York)
Views: 1/52
Views index: 5%
Popularity index: 1.25%
This book provides student journalists, artists, designers, creative writers and web producers with the tools and techniques they need to tell nonfiction stories visually and graphically. Weaving together history, theory, and practical advice, seasoned nonfiction comics professors and scholars Randy Duncan, Michael Ray Taylor and David Stoddard present a hands-on approach to teach readers from a range of backgrounds how to develop and create a graphic nonfiction story from start to finish. The book offers guidance on:
Interviews with well-known nonfiction comics creators and editors discuss best practices and offer readers inspiration to begin creating their own work, and exercises at the end of each chapter encourage students to hone their skills.
Table of Contents
Josh Neufeld: Foreword (ix)
1. Nonfiction Comics (1)
Bibliography (245)
Added by: joachim Last edited by: joachim
PHP execution time: 0.01421 s
SQL connection time: 0.00024 s
SQL execution time: 0.32149 s
TPL rendering time: 0.00124 s
Total elapsed time: 0.33694 s
Peak memory usage: 1.6609 MB
Memory at close: 1.6100 MB


text:
10 minutes ago, Kd4lif3 said:
Ok thanks, that's very helpful. If I am able to stretch for the hd 650's is that something I should stretch for. What kind of difference would I find between the 650 and the 58x
you can get 650 for cheaper on massdrop they are just called 6xx. I personally like the 58x better (reason why I have it). comfort and build : around the same initially clampy btu get a lot more comfortable overtime and build is just ok.
sound the 58x is wider sounding and has better imaging so better for gaming. clarity and fidelity about the same they both pick up a ton of detail. the 58x is a little bit more laid back and has more bass. the 6xx is a more narrower headphone flatter but better for critical listening if you are producing music or listening to classical music they are better. the thing the makes or breaks it for you though is our lack of dac amp the 650 basically require a good dac amp nothing too powerful but has to sound good. and you wont at all be able to drive them off of your yeti while the 58x would be fine.
if you are planning to monitor your voice or record your voice I would not reccoemnd using an open back headphone rather look into closed backs. I could reccomend more if you stated a set budget then I know that I would be working with. also I forgot to mention meze 99 noir headphones.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Call it the Great Trade-Off, perhaps: Consumers give up data to online merchants and marketers in exchange for free services, targeted offers, discounts and other benefits. The people and companies who receive the data use it for a variety of profit-enhancing tasks.
However, part of that trade (even if not explicitly stated) is that consumers expect their data to be handled in a manner that protects their privacy and security. Any company that fails to do so — and is found out — risks existential damage. Consumers may be fickle, as human nature is contradictory and complicated, but they tend to have long memories.
The issues surrounding that trade, and questions involving online authentication, formed the foundation of a recent PYMNTS Digital Discussion entitled "Data: The New Currency of Trust." The discussion featured Karen Webster and Arman Aygen, head of Technology and Innovation at UL.
"The flow of information can only happen if it is built on trust," Aygen told Webster as they started off the webinar.
Trust Evolution
Trust is a concept that can change based on context, era and other shifting factors.
In the 2018 digital world, that concept includes a growing consumer and lawmaker backlash about what they view as lax policies for the protection of shopping and transaction data — along with increasing technology capabilities of collecting even more data and using it to craft precise advertising messages.
At the same time, criminals keep up with those developments, becoming more sophisticated and quickly learning to exploit weaknesses in new fraud prevention products and processes. Especially trendy right now, from a criminal point of view, is account takeovers, according to Aygen.
"It's like a never-ending race," he said. "Whenever you add a layer to prevent what's happening, [criminals] move on to the next area."
It all makes for a complicated situation.
That's not even considering the endurance of passwords, a universal source of consumer frustration (such as the inability to remember multiple passwords), as well as the frustration — that is, friction — of having to reset them when trying to purchase something online or perform other digital tasks. In fact, a poll taken of webinar participants during the presentation found that only a third said passwords do, indeed, have a future.
Machine Help
Even so, machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) are helping to build better defenses against account takeovers and other types of online fraud — including, no doubt, illegal acts that have yet to hit mainstream knowledge. In Aygen's view, machines and humans can — and need to — learn from each other. Humans have certain advantages (ingenuity, for instance), as do machines, which are better at spotting patterns and making predictions. The chess world, he noted, knows that lesson well, given how human players and machines have combined to win tournaments.
An ideal in online trust is what Aygen called "augmented reality," which means "human brain power added to the power of a machine."
Collaboration is also key in building online trust, he said, noting that competitors in payments are increasingly working together on standards and technologies that have a common goal: "Providing value to the consumer at the end of the day," he said.
Wider Net
Another method to defend against fraud and maintain trust in the digital ecosystem is casting a wider net, so to speak, and catching more data signals. They might be IP addresses, for instance, or a machine analysis of how and from where a specific consumer does certain transactions. Maybe authentication — and customer onboarding — involves the use of social signals, those digital crumbs left by consumers on social media and other online platforms.
A danger there, perhaps, is that consumers — cognizant of data security and privacy issues involving social media platforms, or simply no longer as enamored with sharing details of their personal lives online — will pull back and not engage. That said, "there's always going to be new methodologies and sources" to aid with those authentication efforts, Aygen said.
A bigger issue might be finding ways to authenticate consumers without adding friction to transactions or checkout. Biometrics, indeed, seem to be emerging as one way to do that — an increasing number of consumers already are doing that with their smartphones and laptops, after all.
No Longer Binary
One main theme that emerged from the PYMNTS Digital Discussion is that authentication — and, by extension, trust — is "no longer a binary process of accept or reject," as Aygen put it. Instead, it's more holistic, more about the "risk appetite of the organization." However, that also leads to another issue, another type of trade-off: how to be solid and secure with authentication and onboarding without using consumer data in a way that becomes creepy, that results in hyper-personalized ads following people around online.
Those are some of the main issues that digital players of all types need to consider as the global digital ecosystem continues to grow and envelope more retail, financial and service activities. The job will only get harder, more challenging and more complex — more devices in the hands of individual consumers mean more areas where trust can be breached.
"That trust has to be everywhere," Aygen said.
Latest Insights:
The Which Apps Do They Want Study analyzes survey data collected from 1,045 American consumers to learn how they use merchant apps to enhance in-store shopping experiences, and their interest in downloading more in the future. Our research covered consumers' usage of in-app features like loyalty and rewards offerings and in-store navigation, helping to assess how merchants can design apps to distinguish themselves from competitors.


text:
This month, we discuss the topic of "Company as Cause" – using purpose to drive the organization. These were the readings
- Chapter 1 of /Mavericks at Work/
- Simon Sinek TED talk on How Great Leaders Inspire Action
- HBR blog post: Purpose is good, Shared Purpose is Better
- HBR blog post: Your Company's Purpose is not its Vision Statement
Our discussion questions were:
- What is your organization's purpose?
- How do you communicate it internally and externally?
- How do you use it to guide selection of clients, projects, talent, partners, and process?
Notes from our discussion:
What do people have in terms of explicit purpose statements?
Vision statement
How we make decisions
Value proposition for clients
Value proposition for staff
Value proposition for partners
How do we sell
What are our core value
Going to become a handbook – internal and external?
Marketing materials
Balancing quality and profitability
Desired outcomes
Desired process
Client survey
What you're passionate about
Who we are
Relationship between org purpose and founder's values
How is it expressed Internally vs. Externally (communication vs. practices)?
Same / different?
Walking the talk
Need to be able to explain the exceptions to the rule
Must keep restating alignment
When do the exceptions prove the rule
Purpose vs. Cause vs. Beliefs
Often flows from personal purpose / passion of founder(s)
You have client vs. "client of your practice" – have to serve both
Relationship between purpose and belief
General abstract purpose ("safety") is good but better to be specific ("save his life")
WHY as a filter, choosing clients and staff
"Enrollment conversation" vs. sales
Tie directly to client purpose (e.g, tie construction safety to patient safety)
Purpose as project filter: go/no-go > shape scope > cultivate dream projects
purpose is key for attracting millennial talent


text:
Each on the web and skilled matchmakers have indescribable good results pairing individuals. They know how to study individuals and pair them not only primarily based on their likes and dislikes, but also on other factors. If you use a matchmaker, you have nothing at all to be ashamed of, and you do not require to inform any individual. How do matchmakers do it? When a particular person goes in to see a matchmaker or fills out an on the web profile with an web matchmaking internet site, the very first point that occurs is they full data about themselves: their height, weight, hair colour, eye colour, job, interests, religious beliefs, favored activities and other connected data. Then, they fill out data about the particular person they want to be with. Some favor chubby individuals, some individuals favor redheads, and so on.
From there, the matchmaker will pair you with individuals who not only match your preferences, but also have equivalent interests, religious beliefs and political views. When you take a look at a matchmaker, they also take into consideration other factors that you most likely do not believe about. Your clothes style. The way you speak. Your accessories. How you present oneself to other individuals. Even your handshake can say a thing about you. They match you with individuals who have equivalent types. All of this is known as compatibility. Why are matchmakers productive? Considering that matchmakers base couples on compatibility, it tends to make their partnership pairings a great deal additional productive.
When a couple is compatible on lots of unique levels, it enables them to function via partnership issues significantly additional successfully. If you happen to be compatible with an individual, you have equivalent ambitions and desires and your way of attaining them is also equivalent. You have complementary personalities and types. This tends to make it additional most likely that your partnership will be productive. Compatibility things that all matchmakers match you on consist of:
• Power level
• Character sort
• Character
• Religious beliefs
• Likes and dislikes
• Communication types
• Wellness and nutrition
• Education level
• Intimacy levels and compatibility Finding the most out of your matchmaker-client partnership If you want a partnership initiated by a matchmaking service to function, you may possibly have to step outdoors of your comfort level.
That implies that if a particular person comes up to whom you happen to be not initially attracted, you should not discount him or her promptly. Alternatively, give it a shot and see what you like and dislike about that particular person. You can meet with an in-particular person matchmaker to say what you liked about the date and the other person so they can far better matches for you in the future.
Likewise, on the web, you can pick individuals who are ideal for you – you can even carry on a conversation with lots of of them at as soon as to see whom you click with. Just due to the fact a matchmaker says you happen to be a compatible match does not imply that you will function as a couple. And just due to the fact you happen to be not compatible with an individual does not imply that it cannot function.
Relationships are difficult, and the factors that you count on to function are in no way 100 %. That mentioned, a partnership with a couple who is compatible has a a great deal far better opportunity of functioning longterm. And that is why matchmakers pair individuals primarily based on their compatibility levels: it functions. Allen Tane is an seasoned writer on the skilled singles market place and matchmaker dating business. He has been writing for pretty a though and has had numerous articles published. Some of Allen's most favored subjects to create on consist of single pros more than 30, mature skilled singles, relationships, and matchmakers.


text:
Podemos and Cs prepare another No Confidence vote if Sánchez fails as Iglesias plans a motion with the support of Rivera only in order to call elections and PNV will ask Sánchez to respect the budget and not call elections.
The front page headlines in La Vanguardia read:
If you think there's been an oversight or you can provide more more detail about a particular event, I'd be delighted to hear from you.
Please complete the form below. You can also upload photos and images, by the way.
Do you have a great information to add or an opinion to express about on this topic? Share it!


text:
Jewelry is a favorable accessory which is important and precious to every owner which is why it is important to keep the little items safe and sound. Have you ever had a hard time searching for the earrings or getting the necklace out of the other jewelries? If so, you might need to check the best wooden boxes out for they are mainly design to ease the difficulty and help you by offering secure space for all your belongings. The well-designed jewelry box comes with different amazing design which will make you fall in love with hoe elegant it looks and it also add more charms to your room as well. Keeping your jewelries in the box, it will ensure that the jewelries are taking care well because normally the box comes with soft interior which offers great protection to your jewelries. For those who are looking for the best jewelries boxes, this article will help you by review the favorable and the best jewelry boxes which are on sale.
- 1. Lenox Childhood Memories Ballerina Jewelry Box
- 2. Saganizer Cherry Wooden Jewelry Box Organizer
- 3. Mele & Co. Harmony Wooden Musical Jewelry Box
- 4. Seya Modern Wooden Jewelry Box Organizer
- 5. SiCoHome Treasure Box 9.0inch Grape Small Trunk Box for Jewelry
- 6. StarZebra Jewelry Box Novelty Item
- 7. JewelKeeper Wooden Music Box with 3 Pullout Drawers
- 8. KayJayStyles Hand Carved Tree Of Life Wooden Storage Box
- 9. Rowling Extra Large Wooden Jewelry Box
- 10. niceEshop(TM) Women Brown Retro
1. Lenox Childhood Memories Ballerina Jewelry Box
Remember the musical box that we have seen back then in the movie in our childhood time, now it is time to make it real by purchasing this Lenox jewelry box. This stylish jewelry box is a musical ballerina jewelry box which features beautiful design that is an eye catchy one. The box is crafted by metal which is why it could last for long time. Moreover, it comes with many rooms for your jewelry. From now on with this jewelry box, you will be able to place all the jewelry in a good organization which makes it easy for you as well when you want to get the jewelry. Therefore, this fancy jewelry box might be the best choice for you to go for.
2. Saganizer Cherry Wooden Jewelry Box Organizer
The Saganizer is an ideal jewelry box which is designed to fit with a modern lifestyle. This is a modern and stylish jewelry box which is designed to suitable to use for women and men. The wooden jewelry box here features a large compartment which allows roomy space for your jewelry, and you could keep them all in a good order. On the door of this jewelry box, there is necklace hanger which makes space for hanging the necklace. Doing it this way makes it easy for you than just placing the necklace down with all the others jewelries. The three necklaces' hooks each features HD lined in ivory Sueded fabric.
3. Mele & Co. Harmony Wooden Musical Jewelry Box
The Mele & co. jewelry box is an ideal jewelry box that you will be delighted to have it with you. This elegant jewelry box comes with a unique design that makes it stand out very well. The box features dual doors that have got necklace's hooks and there are large drawer which makes room for all your jewelry. Moreover, the inside of this box is designed very thoroughly and it features sand sueded design which offers soft and safe place that could protect your jewelry from scratches and abrasion. Overall, this well-designed jewelry box makes the best jewelry keeping companion that you would appreciate it much.
4. Seya Modern Wooden Jewelry Box Organizer
The Seya is a modern and well-designed jewelry box which is on sale today with an amazing price to check out. This special jewelry box comes with a simple yet unique design that brings a great appearance as well as providing enough room for your beloved jewelry. The box features a contemporary design with shapely hourglass profile. Even special, it comes with Sumptuous tarnish resistant felt fabric which ensures the durability and the safety of your jewelry. For convenience this box also designed with 5 felt-lined drawers and nickel-finished metal pulls. On each side, there are 2 necklace's hooks which allow you to keep the necklace easily.
5. SiCoHome Treasure Box 9.0inch Grape Small Trunk Box for Jewelry
The SiCoHome jewelry box can be more than just a jewelry box for it serve multi-uses. This box features WOOD pirate style treasure chest and the hasp made the chest closely. Moreover, this jewelry box is suitable for keeping variety of belongings such as makeups and jewelries, store holiday cards, tarot decks. It provides space to keep all the essential belongings altogether and at the same time it helps save the space in your room. The box measures by 9″ x 6.3″ x 3.7″ which is a perfect size of the box that could offer great room for all the items. It also makes a perfect gift idea.
6. StarZebra Jewelry Box Novelty Item
This is a unique and mini jewelry box which is thoroughly curved by rosewood. The decoration on the top of this box features a curving of floral flower and it comes with hinged lid along with with interior base and roof covered in red velvet cloth. Moreover, this special jewelry box features a construction of solid and sturdy wood which ensure the longevity of the box. On top of that, the starZebra jewelry box features a special design which makes it a perfect gift for any social and special occasions. It also makes a perfect gift idea for women of all ages.
7. JewelKeeper Wooden Music Box with 3 Pullout Drawers
This magic castle jewelry box might be the one special jewelry box that you have always wanted. The box features a design of magnificent fairy twirls to the tune of "Waltz of the Flowers" and it comes with interior lining which is soft that could offer great protection to your jewelry. Each section of this box is divided separately to give many rooms for different items, and the box also comes with Necklace carousel on the right side. This special and pinky jewelry box makes an ideal box for storing girls' jewelry and other precious belongings. Hence, if you are looking for a large and pinky jewelry box, this makes the best choice for you to take into an account.
8. KayJayStyles Hand Carved Tree Of Life Wooden Storage Box
The KayJaystyles jewelry box is a well-designed and elegant jewelry box which features the design of amazing carving. It features a velvet inner lining to ensure that the belongings put inside remains scratch free and always look good. It is a high quality jewelry bow which is made skilled artisans from India using the finest Indian Rosewood. This box comes in just a perfect size that will offer great storage for all the precious belongings. On top of that, it also adds more modern look to your room when you place this jewelry box in it. All in all, if you are looking for a high quality and we carved jewelry box, this would make the best choice for you.
9. Rowling Extra Large Wooden Jewelry Box
If you are looking for a large capacity jewelry box to place in your bedroom, this one makes the best choice for you to go for. The Rowling jewelry box features a large size and with 3 Removable Drawers, 2 Removable Tray on Top Layer. There is a large top mirror which allows you to see when trying on the jewelry and there is also safe lock which is specially designed for security. This large box comes with roomy compartment which allow you to organize all your precious belongings and there are necklace's hooks which are for easily store the necklace.
10. niceEshop(TM) Women Brown Retro
This is an elegant jewelry box which features an exquisite workmanship. It is a fashionable and stylish jewelry box with 11×10.5x5cm of external dimension and 9.6×9.2x5cm of internal dimension. It makes a perfect jewelry box to store all the precious little things and most importantly this box comes in just a right size which offers roomy space for storage. The material used to make this jewelry box is composite board and it could ensure the durability and stability of the box very well. Hence, if you are looking for a jewelry box that features a unique vintage design, this one would make a good choice for you.


text:
Australian Story – Monday 31 July, 8pm on ABC and ABC iview
Playing With Fire
Wednesday, July 26, 2017 — Bill Shorten ripped me a new one. Senator Sam Dastyari
You can't just think that you live in a business without consequences. Opposition Leader Bill Shorten
Labor Senator Sam Dastyari speaks exclusively to Australian Story to confront head-on the political donations scandal that cost him his seat on the Opposition frontbench last year.
Senator Dastyari was a rising star in the corridors of Parliament House, and on social media, until it was revealed he'd allowed a business with links to the Chinese government to pay a travel bill for his office.
When a day later it was revealed that he had contradicted ALP policy on the South China Sea, at a press conference he had given alongside a major Chinese donor, his career imploded.
The outcome of that press conference was because of my own actions and my own mistake and I resigned to take responsibility and pay the price. Senator Sam Dastyari
This Australian Story features interviews with Sam Dastyari, his family and politicians on all sides.
It traces the colourful 34-year-old's life from his arrival in Australia as a four-year-old, after fleeing the religious regime in Iran with his sister and parents – and returns with him to Iran to visit the home he grew up in.
The gifted student joined the ALP at just 16, wheeling and dealing his way through the Party and enjoying a meteoric rise to the Shadow Ministry.
In this Australian Story, Sam Dastyari answers the lingering questions about his conduct.
"I wasn't just part of the (fundraising) arms race. I was one of the weapon suppliers in this arms race," he says.
The question is, having been a party man since the age of 16, can Sam Dastyari be trusted to change his ways?


text:
Before voting, as these questions
With an Ontario election campaign about to start, what I really want to ask the main party leaders is, "Would you please keep your wretched candidates from ringing my doorbell?" Like Ebenezer Scrooge, I do not conduct my affairs in the teeth of inclement weather. And I'm insulted that you think I'd decide how to vote based on a prepackaged porch pitch without clarifications of the sort candidates do not give while cold wind blows through the doorway onto my dinner. I'm interested in "why" questions, not "what" questions. I want to know why you politicians hold the positions you hold (or claim to) and why you think your solutions would actually work, especially if they're things — like "Target health care funding where it is needed most" — that I've heard a dozen times before. So perhaps I can contribute a few more pertinent questions than "Would you please leave me alone?", which I already know you might possibly do during the campaign if I bar the door and hide under the bed for the next 39 days but most certainly will not do once elected no matter what desperate measures I adopt.
I don't even insist that your answers persuade me. I just want proof that you've thought about this stuff.
On health:
Mr. McGuinty, since health care now takes almost half the provincial budget yet many Ontarians have no family doctor, how high would its share have to go before you concede that the current system is unworkable?
Mr. Tory, your platform speaks of efficiencies, electronic records and healthy lifestyle choices, but if it's so easy to fix the system, why hasn't it been done already by governments panicked by escalating costs?
Mr. Hampton, would you like to see anything else important, such as food or cars, produced under the same basic conditions as health care in Ontario? Would you consider a Canada Food Act ridiculous, and why?
On education:
Mr. Tory, how do we keep publicly funded faith-based schools from teaching divisive or even hateful values?
Mr. Hampton, what right does the state have to pre-empt parents when it comes to their children's moral education?
Mr. McGuinty, why is it divisive for anyone else to have their own publicly funded schools, but not for members of your religion?
On universities:
Mr. Hampton, why should taxpayers subsidize post-secondary tuition for middle-class kids to enjoy lucrative, prestigious careers?
Mr. McGuinty, should public universities restore a structured curriculum in the humanities instead of students choosing "cafeteria-style" from professors' often exotic offerings?
Mr. Tory, why shouldn't Ontario's universities be privatized?
On energy:
Mr. Tory, how much waste does a modern nuclear plant produce in a year and where is it safe to get rid of it, and what kind of conservative would legally require an "energy audit" before a person could sell their house?
Mr. Hampton, how many of those "War of the Worlds" three-bladed windmills would we need to replace the coal-fired plants?
Mr. McGuinty, for years you've been promising to shut the coal-fired plants and haven't pulled it off, so why should we believe anything else you say?
On infrastructure:
Mr. Hampton, if you're not willing to divert billions from social programs, where would you get the money to pay for urgent road and water system work?
Mr. Tory, the Harris Tories loudly boasted that they had solved Ontario's infrastructure woes, so what went wrong and why did their good intentions fail?
Mr. McGuinty, what are Ontario's most pressing $5 billion in infrastructure needs?
On abortion:
Mr. McGuinty, how can you profess to be Roman Catholic yet support abortion?
Mr. Hampton, doesn't abortion on demand favour the male swinger's agenda over genuine respect for women?
Mr. Tory, could anything including the threat of immediate deportation to Neptune induce you to speak the word "abortion" in public, even favourably?
On philosophy:
Mr. McGuinty, how does your liberalism relate to that of John Stuart Mill?
Mr. Tory, how does your conservatism relate to that of Edmund Burke?
Mr. Hampton, how does your socialism relate to that of George Bernard Shaw?
One more, if I may, for all the leaders:
A few weeks back I suggested a reading list for aspiring politicians. And yes, I'd like to know if you'd read any of it. But my question here is what you'd recommend to young people interested in public affairs and seeking to educate themselves. What three books do you think they should read first, and why?
If you can answer these questions you won't need to peddle banalities at my doorstep during dinner. And if you can't, it won't help you to try.
[First published in the Ottawa Citizen]


text:
Quick links [Hide]
Rating: 10.0
Votes: 9
Plays: 2.6k
Happy Dessert is a restaurant simulation game developed by LITTLEGIANTWORLD. This game has simple graphics, suitable for all ages, especially children and families. You can experience this game on your browser because it is a flash game.
In this game, your task is to build and develop restaurants to become famous. At the beginning of the game, you will be introduced to the storyline of the game but you can skip this step if you already know it.
The game will give you 5 gems to get started. First, you have to hire a chef and waiter to work for you. You also need to buy a "recipe" so the chef can make the dish.
Once all is ready, you can open the restaurant for the customer. When you have enough money, you can upgrade your restaurant. There are 3 features for you to upgrade: Decorate, Recipee and Upgrade.
Decorate: You can decorate your window, door, floor, table, wall ... but it will cost you gems.
Recipee: You can buy more food to serve customers. There are a total of 12 dishes in this category.
Upgrade: In this section, you can buy more tables and chairs, hire more staff, chefs ...
In addition, the game features Achievement with 26 targets waiting for you.
If you are interested in this game, you can also play similar games as Papa's Hot Doggeria, Papa's Bakeria …


text: Nick wins 1st Place at the Annual Australian Society of Magicians Competition Hello Party People Last week I was presented with my award for 1st place at the Australian Society of Magicians annual Magic Competitions. I wanna say thanks to my friends, family & my lady for helping me work on the routine. Nick Advertisements Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:Like Loading... Related


text:
I'm all about mixing patterns! And, stripes and plaid are a favorite combination of mine. Plus, plaid button up shirts can be worn so many different ways. If you haven't noticed - I like to buy pieces that are easy to switch up (hey! I work hard and like to know I'm going to get my money's worth!). Also, can't go wrong with a striped dress. Tie your plaid shirt around your waist, throw on an army green bomber or pair it with some bright pink tassel heels. One dress, so many cute ways to wear it!
I take this Madewell bag everywhere - in fact, it's my go-to bag when flying because it's super durable and spacious (like it fits all the things I couldn't stuff into my suitcase lol). It's been a great investment and it's timeless too! As are these white converse and this gold Michael Kors watch. I've had the watch for years and I still love to wear it. It can work with a casual outfit or looks just as good with an outfit you wear out or to work. I'm here to help you find pieces that will stay in your wardrobe rotation - you should have pieces you love in your closet! And they're always better when they don't look the same boring way every time you wear them.
Check out some striped dresses and plaid shirts I'm scoping out below. I've also linked the exact tote, shoes and a similar watch. All you have to do is click on the image and you'll be taken directly to the websites where you can purchase each item :)


text:
How come there is no Vogue Philippines?
No reason, really, why the question popped. It's just I never thought about it. Oh and probably after I've seen this on Vogue China.
Kate Moss, Vogue China
Any answers?
Speaking of Vogue, the documentary "The September Issue" is bound to be released in US theaters August 28. Again, I am not quite sure if this will ever reach the Philippine shores but I'm crossing my fingers.
Happy Sunday, everyone!


text:
U. C. Prasad (MD and Head – Metals & Power)
With over 40 years of experience in engineering pertaining to civil, electrical and operation, maintenance and upgradation, U C Prasad has the breadth and depth of experience needed to quickly understand entreprises' businesses and craft the most suitable solutions. Before founding Sibol Infrastructure, U C Prasad worked in public and private sector for over four decades and has successful track record of fulfilling arduous tasks in Project Management or Power & Steel production, capacity expansion and improvement in steel & power sector for business growth. He recently retired as Director (Power Project) from FACOR Power Limited. Prior to this he worked in senior management roles at SKS Ispat and Power, Sunflag Iron & Steel, NALCO and SAIL Bokaro.
P. K. Routray (Head – Technology & Mining)
With 39 years of experience, Prashanta K Routray has impeccable record in design and engineering, construction and commissioning of Mines, Plant, Port Facilities & Steam Generation Plant and later Smelter and Captive Power Plant Expansion. He started his career at SAIL, Bhilai and then moved to SAIL, Bokaro. In 1989, he joined NALCO, where he spent most of his career.At NALCO, he moved up the ranks from Dy. Chief Engineer to Director (Production), where he had overall charge of all production units viz. Mines, Alumina refinery, Smelter and Captive Power Plant. It was in his tenure as Director (Production), when NALCO achieved the status of NAVRATNA.
Rajiv Ranjan Jha (Head – Civil & Construction)
With over 36 years of experience, Rajiv Ranjan Jha worked in various capacities from Assistant Engineer to Chief Engineer in the Dept. of Road Construction and Building Construction, Govt. of Bihar. Rajiv Jha, in his career, has handled projects worth over 2000 crores from preparation to monitoring to implementation of Road and Building
J. K. Verma (Head – Electronics & Automation)
Jyotindra K Verma has to his credit over 40 years of professional experience in different companies out of which for over 35 years, he had been an integral part of the global conglomerate M/s Siemens Ltd. Towards the end of his tenure with M/s Siemens, he held the position as CEO, Drive Technologies Division for South Asia Cluster of countries including India. As Business Head, in addition to heading multiple Business Units, he was responsible for various associated factories located in different states of India.


text:
Press Information Bureau
Government of India
Prime Minister's Office
08-November-2010 15:07 IST
Prime Minister's Statement to the Media at the joint Press Conference with the U.S. President
Following is the text of Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh's statement to the media at the joint Press Conference with U.S. President Barack Obama in New Delhi today:
"I am delighted to welcome President Obama on his first visit to India.
I welcome the President as a personal friend and a charismatic leader who has made a deep imprint on world affairs through his inclusive vision of peace, security and welfare for all peoples and all nations. The President and the First Lady have made an abiding impression on the people of India, with their warmth, with their grace and with their commitment to promoting relationships between our two great democracies.
President Obama yesterday characterized the India-US partnership as one of the defining and indispensable partnerships of the 21st century. In my discussions with the President, we have decided to accelerate the deepening of our ties and to work as equal partners in a strategic relationship that will positively and decisively influence world peace, stability and progress.
We welcome the decision by the United States to lift controls on export of high technology items and technologies to India, and support India's membership in multilateral export control regimes such as the Nuclear Suppliers Group. This is a manifestation of the growing trust and confidence in each other. We have agreed on steps to expand our cooperation in the space, civil nuclear, defence and other high end sectors.
We have announced specific initiatives in the areas of clean energy, health and agriculture. These include a Joint Clean Energy Research and Development Centre, the establishment of a Global Disease Detection Centre in India and an agreement for cooperation in weather and crop forecasting. We have decided to hold a Higher Education Summit next year. Cooperation in the field of education sector holds great promise because no two other countries are better equipped to be partners in building the knowledge economy of the future.
The United States is one of our largest trading partners. Our trade is balanced and growing. India is among the fastest growing sources of investment in the United States. Indian investments have helped to increase the competitiveness of the US economy. We welcome increased US investment and high technology flows in key sectors of our economy, including the sector of nuclear energy. We have agreed to facilitate trade and people-to-people exchanges, recognizing that protectionism is detrimental to both our economies.
I conveyed our gratitude to the President for the cooperation we have received in our counter-terrorism measures post Mumbai. We will start a new Homeland Security Dialogue to deepen this cooperation.
We had a detailed exchange on the situation in our extended region, including East Asia, Afghanistan, Pakistan and West Asia. We have a shared vision of security, stability and prosperity in Asia based on an open and inclusive regional architecture. We have agreed to broaden our strategic dialogue to cover other regions and areas, and initiate joint projects in Africa and Afghanistan.
As States possessing nuclear weapons, we have today put forth a common vision of a world without nuclear weapons, and decided to lead global efforts for non-proliferation and universal and non-discriminatory global nuclear disarmament. This is a historic and bold bilateral initiative. We have also decided to strengthen cooperation to tackle nuclear terrorism, and we welcome US participation in the Global Center for Nuclear Energy Partnership which will be set up in India.
President Obama is a sincere and valued friend of our country and our discussions have led to a meeting of minds. Ours is a partnership based on common values and interests, a shared vision of the world and the deep rooted ties of friendship among our two peoples. I look forward to working with the President to realize the enormous potential of this partnership of our two countries.
I now invite President Obama to make his remarks."


text:
IGP Pujith Jayasundara said he would only act in accordance with the gazette notification issued by President Maithripala Sirisena on the appointment of Mahinda Rajapaksa as the Prime Minister.
"As the IGP, I can only act according to gazette notifications. Therefore, I have to work under the instructions of President Maithripala Sirisena who holds the position of Law and Order Minister, " the Police chief explained.
Jayasundara convened a special press conference at the Police headquarters this afternoon, to explain his position on the matter.
He said he was not in a position to accept the instructions issued to him by former Law and Order Minister Ranjith Maddumabandara who said he was still the "lawful minister" overlooking the subject.
Madduma Bandara's statement was based on Speaker Karu Jayasuriya's conclusion that Ranil Wickremesinghe would remain the lawful Prime Minister of the country unless proven otherwise by a Parliamentary majority.


text:
10 Factors That Happen When you find yourself In Funnel hacking.
If You Want Quick Tips Regarding Generating An Income Online, This Post Is It
To make money, you will need to put in the time necessary to have success. The better effort you add into your revenue streams, the more money will start to flow in your direction. When it comes to online money making opportunities, this couldn't be true. Learn more from the following.
Before you could make any online income, you've got to decide what your niche will be. Is writing something you succeed at? Become a content writer. Is graphic design something you do well at? A lot of people can hire you to definitely punch up their documents or sites. Introspection is a good thing to hold onto during this period.
Writers can certainly make a few bucks on sites such as InfoBarrel or Squidoo. These internet sites allow you to pick topics you like, and you also get a few of the incoming money. They both permit you to use Amazon's affiliate marketing online program for even greater earning potential.
Take surveys. There are several out there. Surveys might be a wonderful way to generate income online. Depending on the site, they often don't pay much. Nonetheless, it's simple to do them inside your free time, and you may make a substantial amount of money.
You need to anticipate to prove your identity if you want to make money online. Plenty of places will want you to show ID along with other types of validation just like if you are gonna just work at a normal job. You ought to have all your ID able to convey digitally so the process is going to be easy.
You can just search Google for pointers about producing money. You will recognize that search engine listings will deliver up many pages containing countless wealth creation options to select from. Find something which is intriquing, notable and read reviews concerning the company before proceeding. After looking at reviews, proceed carefully.
Put your down a chance to good use. You can make money online without focusing too much on something. Places like Mechanical Turk, or mturk.com, can provide small tasks. You can work with these tasks while you watch some TV. While you are unlikely to create wads of cash carrying this out, you will be making use of your down time productively.
It may take a chance to discover ways to cash in on online work.
Your greatest chance is finding someone already a successful expert and learning from them. Get by using a guru, chat, and be sure the legitimacy of your websites you're on. Be sure to keep the mind open and you will definitely be earning money online very quickly.
To produce income online, consider internet affiliate marketing. To achieve success, you have to own an internet site that gets a lot of traffic funnel hacking Give consideration to the types of themes and topics that you simply enjoy covering. Then you can certainly sign up to affiliate products. After this you obtain a percentage of the things that visitors buy.
You will possibly not be rich per day, but you're able to work to make a lot of cash. You have to know much more about being efficient reading this article. Utilize this advice to enjoy an effective future!.


text:
The studio are one of the most respected and well-known in the industry. With a huge player base and many of the industry's flagship IP's, it's looking to welcome a Lead Environment Artist for a significant next gen console title.Based in the business district of Singapore, the development team and culture is like no other – truly open and transparent veterans of the industry that have created recent titles that continue to be talked about constantly, streamed and played to this day.
Key Skills;


text:
There will always come a time when the décor in your house is outdated and old-fashioned. As the DIY trend continues to grow, more and more people are now looking at decorating and fixing up their own homes. Here at Able Skills we understand no all jobs are easy and we have the perfect introduction courses that allow people to get a basic skill set of the trade they need, such as our tiling courses.
Tiling trends are always changing, and people are always looking to be up-to-date with the ongoing décor trends. However, tiling isn't like a fish in water, it has a lot more to it and is quite a skill. Our Introduction to Tiling course is perfect for anyone looking to complete some DIY tiling as they cover all the basics in a five-day course.
Our introduction course has proven to be a huge success and being recognised by City & Guilds has meant the popularity has grown even more. It's a five-day course that provides our students with all the skills they need to carry out work in their own homes. Here are the tasks that are undertaken in the weeks course:
- Wall Tiling
- Floor Tiling
- Grouting
- Cleaning
- Setting up
- Cutting Tiles
- Explanation of Tools
- How to work around sockets etc.
Along with the standard five-day course, we also offer two other options which are the 3 Week DIY Tiling Course and the 4 Week DIY Tiling Course. These offer an extended range of advanced skills for our students and a chance to learn more tiling tasks.
For those looking to take their training even further we offer City & Guilds courses and Diplomas, as well as NVQs in Tiling. All our tiling courses can be booked here.
Also, if you are interested in any of our tiling courses please feel free to give us a call and ask any questions you may have. Call 0808 100 3245 or even pop down and see our centre.


text:
A single person re-creating Pac-Man to run on PC may seem like an insignificant excercise by today's standards, but what if the game was recreated in Microsoft Excel?...
Posted by Nobody on October 31, 2003 12:52 PM
If you use an RSS reader, you can subscribe to a feed of all future entries tagged 'Excel'. [What is this?]
Other tags used on this blog:


text:
"Alternative" media producer and self-described anarchist James Corbet recently posted a video entitled "Meet Noam Chomsky, Academic Gatekeeper." And by gatekeeper he of course means undercover agent of some sort, although Corbett never does say for whom. I am writing about this for a few reasons, not the least is that there has been a debate within the Left about whether "conspiracy theories" serve our revolutionary purpose by exposing the lethal squalor at the heart of the capitalist order, or, on the other hand, deplete our energy and resources and avert our gaze from the proper course. Corbett is a "conspiracy theorist," to use that awful phrase, and Chomsky is perhaps the most prominent conspiracy denier in the world. As you will read, I am an admirer of Chomsky, and I despise Corbett, but I am in agreement with the latter about the JFK assassination, and, to a lesser extent, the Federal Reserve, and have long been bewildered by Chomsky's uncharacteristically peevish reluctance to yield to the ever-growing body of evidence, now monumental, insisting that he is wrong. Of greater weight and interest, however, is how one putative "anarchist truth-teller" like Corbett uses these conspiracies to discredit the man who is arguably the greatest anarchist voice of his time, a man who has been telling truth to power and anyone who will listen for decades.
Several matters of import to anarchists converge in Corbett's video. There has been an attempt in the last few decades, accelerated by the popularity of the OccupyMovement, to conflate anarchism with (brace yourselves) capitalism. Non-statist free-marketeers like Corbet have already usurped the word "libertarian," and now these anarcho-capitalists are calling themselves anarchists.
Through the centuries we have had any number of tendencies appropriating our name and revolutionary appeal. The worst were integral nationalism and national syndicalism, two distinctly authoritarian philosophies which claimed anarchist lineage and principles. The latest abuse of the term is national anarchism, which is, in the fancy of its delusional adherents, a fusion of anarchism and Third Position fascism.
And now we have capitalist anarchism, an old idea re-emerging from the reactionary muck.
I believe this to be a matter worthy of our attention as words, as somebody famously observed, control ideas and ideas control people. At issue here is what it means to be an anarchist. The battle for the appellation itself is a struggle for its meaning and legacy, a struggle for our heritage. What makes the "anarchist" Corbett's shrieking harangue significant is that while it appears to be nothing more than a low-brow phillipic against Chomsky, it is in fact an attack on class struggle anarchism, real anarchism, from under its own banner. I have three purposes: to expose Corbett for the fraud he is; to examine propaganda techniques; and to rescue anarchism, in name and theory, from those like him whose aim it is to pervert it. There is no room in anarchism for capitalism.
Corbett says Chomsky is a spook. I do not dismiss this charge out of hand. Academia and the media are riven with people working for the state, as has been manifoldly attested and confirmed by countless FOIA disclosures, defector revelations, and even Agency and Bureau testimony in court and before Congress. That a champion of Left causes and fierce critic of American imperialism like Chomsky may in fact be working for the other side is not so far-fetched. Many a people's tribune has turned out to be an imposter. "Gatekeeping" is at least as old as the American Revolution, wherein a number of purported revolutionaries aided the counterrevolutionary junta (aka the Founding Fathers) in imposing their Constitution by deliberately misrepresenting its contents. The toiling classes discovered the subterfuge only when it was too late to save their sovereign commoner's assemblies, their non-profit land banks, their revolution.[1]
This is but one example, there are many, many others, so let's keep an open mind.
There are four possibilities:
1) Corbett is not a spook who has correctly identified Chomsky as a spook.
2) Corbett is not a spook who has misidentified Chomsky as a spook.
3) Corbett is a spook who is targeting Chomsky in order to discredit him.
4) They are both spooks.
Do not dismiss this last, the "Mighty Wurlitzer" never ceases. Both of these men fit the bill, and are the kind of people intelligence agencies put in place or recruit. Certainly the Bureau would love to run Corbett and Chomsky, to occupy the space where these men have influence. And both men look as though they were straight from central casting; Corbett with his murine, cartoonish face and voice to match; Chomsky with his soft-spoken, avuncular demeanor, inexhaustible patience and elfish appearance. Whenever I see him on the screen I want to pour him a cup of coffee.
Both these men are perfect for the role of gatekeeper, but are they?
As we shall see, Corbett's case against Chomsky is deeply flawed, absurdly so, but before we begin we should examine the two divergent, one might say antithetical, conceptions of anarchism espoused by our two principals.
Chomsky is an anarcho-syndicalist. This concept has been condensed as "the workplace replaces city hall." That is non-authoritarian trade unions rise up, abolish the state and capitalism, and run production and work out distribution and exchange in federation with the unions in other industries. And whatever other social administration (what some might call governance), if any, is necessary, is conducted by these same federated bodies in conjunction with territorial entities–neighborhood assemblies, municipal councils, regional councils etc.; no state, no capital, no markets, no classes, no bosses, no inequality, no wage slavery. Voluntary cooperation replaces capitalist competition and state coercion. [2]
Anarchism, that is social or class struggle anarchism of the type endorsed by Chomsky, can be rendered as "without hierarchy," and this principle may be best understood by what it is not.
If one wishes to gain wealth and hold power, to rule, one must control the labor of other human beings. Even if you were a superb widget-maker, the best in the world, you could only amass slightly more wealth than the world's other widgeteers. In order to be lord, however, one must have vassals, there is no other way. In our time the way in which this is done is by hiring workers to produce at a fixed wage or salary, and selling the product of their labor for a sum greater than it cost to produce. That difference between cost and revenue, the profit, is kept by the owner of the widget factory. This system produces two classes: owners and workers, and the former dominate the latter, not only economically, but politically and socially as well. The profits thus derived are also called capital, hence the term capitalism.
This capitalist order where the lower class of people, workers, have no choice but to go hat in hand to some owner or his state, to sell their labor for a price less than what it is worth in order to make a living, is hierarchical and extractive and hence is anathema to anarchists. This is why just about all varieties of anarchism take workers' control at the point of production as 1) its defining principle, the sina qua non of the social revolution; and 2) the best preventive of counterrevolution (i.e. the rise of a new ruling class as occurred in authoritarian socialist states like the USSR and Red China). Anarchism, with its insistence on freedom and equality, is infrangibly anti-capitalist.
James Corbett is an anarcho-capitalist who believes that the systemic collapse of '08 was caused by government regulation of the economy.
And I can personally attest that James Corbett is a liar. I have listened to at least parts of a dozen or so of his podcasts, and I have heard him on more than one occasion say that he answers every e-mail which he receives. I have sent him at least three, and he hasn't answered any of them. Corbett is a global warming denier. In one of his podcasts he risibly asserts that it is a hoax, and that this hoax was perpetrated by a vast environmentalist conspiracy. He insists that they "knew" the data supporting climate change was unreliable, but used it anyway in an effort to advance their agenda. He implores environmentalists to give up their mendacious ways.
In one email I asked him if this were so, how was it that these lying tree-huggers were able to gain the complicity of the Pentagon in their conspiracy, as it has made public a number of its own studies which confirm that the planet is heating up? I also pointed out that given that the greenhouse effect has been known to science for centuries now, climate deniers are going to have to come up with an explanation for why it would not be occurring in the atmosphere when we continue to pump hydrocarbons from under the ground into the air, and the sun continues to shine. No answer was forthcoming.
If, dear reader, you are asking yourself at this point why I am bothering with this dimwit and why you should continue reading, I cannot blame you. But Corbett is one of the more important players in this effort to syncretize anarchism and capitalism. And, as we shall see, Corbett has a surprise in store at the end of his diatribe.
The problem is that Corbett has become popular, and many of his listeners are being introduced to anarchism by his media. He has produced or participated in a number of broadcasts on the topic, all largely worthless. There has been a discussion on the subject of authority and the state going back at least to the ancient Greeks and reaching a crescendo in the nineteenth century with the debate between Marx and Bakunin, and none of this material has ever managed to intrude upon Corbett's discourse on the subject. They are as facile and misleading as they could be. In one, he speaks favorably of corporations, and discusses how within an anarchist society people could freely unite to do something about homelessness. Thus in his anarchism private property and its attendant class divisions are retained, with its victims free to organize themselves to deal as best they can with its immiserating effects. There will be no emancipation of labor, no equality, no freedom from wage slavery.
In the same video he plays a clip of fellow psuedo-anarchist, Larkin Rose, who states that we bring the state into existence when we pay our taxes. And, even more absurdly, that we can defeat the state by withholding our payments.
Obviously, Corbett, Rose, Molineux et alia are unwilling or unable to discuss the subject of anarchism in a realistic and meaningful way. So then why have they garnered such a wide and growing audience? A pregnant question whose possible answers will be explored below, but in Corbett's case his smarmy, bookish, nerd-next-door broadcast persona and his polished delivery have a kind of normative appeal, particularly to those not accustomed to subjecting what they hear to scrutiny. He has been well trained, and is effective at what he does. The argument he advances is farcical, embarrassing really, but it is presented with cunning and brio.
He begins his screed by saying that it would be "easy" to dismiss Chomsky as an "idiot or charlatan." Would it? I imagine that trying to prove that Noam Chomsky is an idiot is a tall order indeed, even if we grant the use of the term is hyperbolic. He's a seminal linguistic theorist, earned dozens of honorary degrees, won a number of prestigious prizes; he has even had a chimp named after him (although I wonder how he feels about that). Why would anybody begin a case against Chomsky by saying something as foolish as that? So that he can dismiss it in the next breath, thus persuading his audience that he is taking an even-handed, reasoned approach, thereby adding to his credibility. Corbett then insists that it would be "intellectually dishonest" to dismiss Chomsky in that fashion.
Establishing one's objectivity and integrity when one is about to launch a partisan offensive is the first of many propaganda techniques Corbett will employ.
Indeed it would be dishonest. But it is his intention, lest we forget, to prove that Chomsky is a charlatan.
Corbett: "Let us not build a straw man, let us not devolve into mere name-calling or argument by labeling…" Stating that you do not plan to do precisely what you intend is a familiar propaganda technique. Again it assures a non-reflective audience that your intentions are noble and that you are going to abide by the rules of decency and fair play, even when, particularly when, it is not your object to do so.
Corbett then introduces an interview with one of Chomsky's colleagues who provides a brief biography of Chomsky. Pinker says nothing of any analytical value, but his interview serves propaganda purposes: It introduces the notion that there are two kinds of anarchism, Left and Right (i.e. socialist and capitalist); that Chomsky is a "polarizing" figure; and that his linguistic theories are "needlessly complicated," useful points if you are trying to undermine Chomsky.
Then Corbett introduces a compilation clip of Chomsky which he lauds again creating the false impression that Corbett's critique is balanced. It also goes to Corbett's bona fides as an "alternative" news and analysis source.
Corbett then introduces some Chomsky clips, the ones to which he objects by saying "The function of a gatekeeper is not to spout one-hundred-percent lies all the time or to be some kind of bumbling fool who doesn't know what he is talking about. It is to be exceptionally smart, exceptionally good, exceptionally keen analyst on enough topics that people will buy into what your saying so that on those one or two topics that you have to skirt around and you have to get your audience to stop paying attention to you can do so with some credibility, building up the capital in order to spend it."
Quite so! But is Corbett describing Chomsky or his own mission? Let's see.
Before playing the clip, Corbett pointedly says "I do question the way in which his supporters tend to support him no matter what he is saying whether it is rational or evidence based or not." Here Corbett is spinning Chomsky's comments in advance of his audience's hearing them. This is a another crucial propaganda technique as it preempts his listeners from forming their own opinions. It also suggests that what they will hear is irrational and unsupported by facts. Perhaps more importantly for his purpose, it depicts Chomsky supporters, Left anarchists according to Pinker's characterization, as mindless, awe-struck thralls.
In addition to discrediting prominent anarchists, one of the objectives of those, like Corbett, now engaged in trying to imbue the word "anarchism" with a capitalist meaning is to distort the real nature and history of the movement. Does Chomsky have supporters? Is there any group, has there ever been any group of human beings in the history of our species, more independent of thought and deed, more aggressively non-conformist, less credulous, less sycophantic and more resistant to domination by a strong leader than the anarchists? Answer: no. Does our "comrade" James Corbett not share this opinion? Is he that ignorant of the history of the political philosophy which he himself espouses? Or is he attempting to deceive his listeners? Let's continue.
It begins with a question from the audience. Somebody asks that given that the Federal Reserve Bank is owned by a bunch of private bankers "do you think it would remedy the situation at all to return the power of printing money and issuing currency to the people of the United States."
Before moving on to Chomsky's response, it should be noted that the question is itself specious as the power of issuing currency never belonged the people of the United States and never will so long as capitalism prevails, so it could not be "returned." Before The Federal Reserve Act, it was done by the Treasury Department, and before that by private bankers without monopoly power.
Chomsky: "Frankly there is a lot of feeling about that, but I really think it is misguided. I don't think the problem is printing fiat currency…if you eliminate capitalism then there are other options…but that's not on the agenda, we have a state capitalist economy…Maybe in the long term it can be worn away maybe overthrown, I hope so, but the issue now is how do you function in a sensible state capitalist economy." He goes on to say that given that we are in a capitalist economy, that there is a need for a central bank. He adds that the sensible thing to do for the economy would be to stimulate demand by government investment. In short, Chomsky says he wants to eliminate capitalism, but since this isn't happening anytime soon that state capitalism with a central bank is better than without.
The clip ends and Corbett says "How illuminating…Noam Chomsky apparently has no real dispute with the Federal Reserve, which is an exceptionally interesting and seemingly contradictory position for a self-professed anarcho-syndicalist to be taking. Oh yes we…need a central bank in order to…have government investment in order to stimulate demand in the economy. That's the sensible way to organize an economy according to this anarcho-syndicalist. It is a position that is rife with self-contradictions and innacuracies but one which I think does go some way toward showing…that Chomsky's supporters obediently clap and applause [sic] and cheer every time they feel that their guru is winning over [sic] against the person who is asking that evil question with that hidden agenda. And I think there is [sic] a number of things we can point out about this video..as to why an anarcho-syndicalist like Chomsky would be interested in a central bank…"
How extraordinary. Here we have the truth stood on its head.
Where to begin? Chomsky has no dispute with a central bank? He, unlike Corbett, has a problem with capitalism itself, as he made clear. He states that if you could eliminate capitalism you could eliminate the central bank–hardly an endorsement. Does Corbett not listen to the media he posts for his audience? Did he miss it? Is he just plain stupid? Or is it he who has a hidden agenda?
Chomsky does not say we need a central bank in order to have government investment, Corbett made that up. Chomsky does not say that that is a sensible economy, here and elsewhere he explicitly states that capitalist economies are not sensible. He states that capitalism cannot bring money, labor and prospective public projects together despite the abundance of all three.
There are no contradictions in anything Chomsky said, and nothing that could be called "inaccurate." Corbet offers, and can offer, nothing in defense of these charges.
Absurd enough, but Corbett isn't done: Ignoring for the moment whether one could determine solely by listening to applause whether it was the reflexive act of obedient supporters or the assent of rational, independently thinking people, is there anything in the clip which suggests the cultish devotion Corbett sees? This accusation is belied by the fact that the audience doesn't cheer every point Chomsky makes.
It is Corbett and not Chomsky who described the person asking the question as "evil", and his being motivated by a "hidden agenda." Chomsky characterized the respondent merely as "misguided," not nefarious or disingenuous.
Here Corbett employs the mother of all straw man arguments. Usually the term is used to describe the process of taking an opponent's argument to the extreme, and then criticizing it for its extremity. But here Corbett invents the straw man out of whole cloth by attributing positions to Chomsky which the latter did not take, and to which he does not adhere. Goebbels once said that the larger the lie is the more likely it is to be believed. I doubt that that is true, but apparently Corbet doesn't.
Early on in the broadcast Corbett insisted that he wouldn't resort to a straw man argument and wouldn't name-call (guru). Clearly, he wasn't telling us the truth.
Now we see why Corbett had to introduce the clip in question to prefigure the response, another common propaganda technique, as the things Chomsky says and Corbett's interpretations of them are incompatible. Nobody listening to this clip without being herded to a specific point of view would conclude that Chomsky believed the person asking the question about the central bank was evil or had a hidden agenda. That requires the skillful manipulation of a liar like Corbett.
Finished with the Fed, Corbett moves onto the JFK assassination.
He cites an essay from a website which he does not identify. A search revealed that it was http://22november1963.org.uk. The "about this website" page is quite long and reveals nothing.
Corbett quotes:
A JFK assassination researcher, Raymond Marcus, attempted in 1969 to get a number of well–known activist academics, including Chomsky and Howard Zinn, interested in the assassination:
I had assembled a portfolio of evidence, primarily photographic, that I could present briefly but adequately in 30–60 minutes. …
I first met with Noam Chomsky. Soon after our discussions began, he asked his secretary to cancel his remaining appointments for the day. The scheduled one–hour meeting stretched to 3–4 hours. Chomsky showed great interest in the material. We mutually agreed to a follow–up session later in the week. …
Chomsky indicated he was very interested, but would not decide before giving the matter much careful consideration. …
It was clear that what Chomsky "won't be able to decide" until he returned from England was not the question of whether or not there was a conspiracy — that he had given every indication of having already decided in the affirmative — but whether or not he wished to participate actively, even to assume a leading role, in the movement to reopen the case.
It is remarkable indeed that this alleged encounter between Marcus and Chomsky gets published on an obscure JFK website, by an unidentified publisher. Chomsky has been steadfast in his anti-conspiracy stance, and this is the only bit of information which suggests that he might not be sincere. What a shame we cannot confirm it because the alleged interviewer is dead. Marcus lived for decades after this alleged meeting with Chomsky and yet said nothing. Why did he not mention it after the publication of Chomsky's Rethinking Camelot?
The implication, in concert with Corbett's allegation, is that Chomsky is a spook who knows JFK got whacked by his own government but is doing what he can to protect the killers. There are many problems with this interpretation, as I will explore below, but it is difficult to put any stock in this specific allegation. One can only wonder why if Chomsky is working for the Bureau he would have given any sign that he was interested in Marcus' evidence. Here even Corbett acknowledges that this account is suspect, "but if we take it at face value…"
Shameless. But if we take the Warren Commission's report at face value…
Corbett quotes Chomsky from the article in question:
"History isn't physics, and even in physics nothing is really 'proven.'"
Corbett says "which I guess is some sort of grand statement to say that 'we can never know what happened in history so why bother thinking about it.' That would at least be my reading of that statement."
Once again we are confronted with the unnavigable abyss between what Chomsky said and what Corbett says about it. Chomsky is channeling Karl Popper whose view it was a century ago, then controversial now widely accepted, that we cannot say that any theorem is proven. We can only say that it hasn't been disproved yet. Popper cites Newton whose ideas were uncontested for centuries until Einstein's ideas supplanted them. This is, at least, how I interpret Chomsky's observation. In any case, the quote above does in no way support Corbett's characterization. Moreover, suggesting that Chomsky believes that we can never know what happened is a grotesque distortion of his life's work, given that he has spent most of it debunking official state narratives. Either Corbett is unfamiliar with Chomsky's views on the subject, about which the latter has written extensively, or he's lying again.
Like the Fed deception, this is a very big lie. Chomsky is incredibly prolific. There is a great corpus of work–articles, speeches, books, documentaries–which disproves Corbett's assertion that Chomsky thinks history is not worth examining. This would seem a precarious position for Corbett as he could so easily be discredited, but the point of propaganda is to distort and that requires taking some risks. Anyone familiar with Chomsky will recognize Corbett's video for the craven dissimulation it is. But if he eventually is exposed, there will be somebody else to take his place. Perception management is an important task for the ruling class. If people ever learn the truth, then it will be over for the oligarchs. Capital never rests, because it can't.
Corbett makes much hay over Chomsky's notorious "Who cares! What difference does it make [if 9/11 were an inside job]." Corbett clips the tape in the middle of Chomsky's response so we don't know what follows. I will not presume to speak for Chomsky, but other Lefties who have expressed similar sentiments have indicated that if JFK's assassins were uncovered they would just be brought forward, reviled from sea to shining sea, tried and executed. The empire would roll on without a so much as a hiccup. Again, I do not know if that is what Chomsky said after he was cut off by Corbett, but he has said that these conspiracy theories are a distraction. Nineteen embittered Muslims with box-cutters or the domestic state goons, capital still rules.
Corbett characterizing his view of Chomsky's opinion: "Why do these crazy conspiracy theorists waste their time and their political energies on these side issues of no importance whatsoever when there are really serious things to be concerned about like establishing a decent minimum wage for the U.S. working class, that has to be facilitated of course by a central bank…stimulating the economy…[this is] one of those arrow-through-the-brain moments when you realize that Chomsky isn't being honest with himself let alone with the audience, well perhaps is being honest with himself and just lying to the audience…again he contradicts himself by saying 'what would it matter if 9/11 were an inside job' even as he goes on to say that even if it came out it would mean the destruction of the Republican Party."
How illuminating (to borrow Corbett's phrase)! His comments speak to the heart of this struggle for the soul of anarchism. Our "anarchist" comrade cannot contain his contempt for the working class. What difference does it make to the mother who cannot buy the medicine her child needs because her employer doesn't provide insurance, or the pensioner who has to eat cat food because her SS check just isn't sufficient, what difference does it make to them whether it was a lone gunmen or a team of state assassins who shot Kennedy? The difference between Chomsky and Corbett, between anarchism and anarcho-capitalism, comes into the light here. Providing relief for those people whose labor is so undercompensated that they cannot make ends meet is of less importance to Comrade Corbett than DNAing Kennedy's killers. How obscene.
How revealing that Comrade Corbett introduces the minimum wage. Chomsky doesn't mention it (at least not in the clip provided), it is in fact a non-sequitir! (No straw-man argument?) How telling that as efforts to raise the minimum wage to a livable standard spread across the country, Agent Corbett inserts this issue dismissively in a critique of America's most famous anarchist. It is of no relevance, yet Corbett conjures the subject from oblivion and imputes it to a man whom he is insisting is a gatekeeper. Remember, dear reader, we are trying to determine whether either, neither, or both of these men are spooks. Is Corbett a proletariat-hating, corporation-loving anarchist or an agent of "the powers that should not be," as he calls them?
An arrow-through-the-brain moment indeed!
The destruction of the Republican Party: Chomsky said that he didn't believe that 9/11 could be an inside job because (among other reasons) if the plot were leaked it would mean its demise (i.e. that the well being of the Republican Party was important to its membership, hence he doesn't believe they would engage in such a conspiracy). He does not say that the end of the GOP would matter either to him or to American polity. And indeed the destruction of the Republican Party would not alter anything. A new party would emerge from its ashes calling itself the Tax the Poor Party, or the Outsource, Deregulate, Privatize and Invade Party, or maybe just the Conservative Party. Nothing would change.
Corbett concludes that it is obvious that Chomsky is avoiding talking about certain issues (despite Corbett's having critiqued Chomsky's responses upon the issues Corbett claims Chomsky isn't talking about) and asks why? He then brings on James Tracey who says nothing of note about Chomsky but again we see the word "polarizing" affixed to him.
Corbett: "This brings us back to that question which is the…starting point of any investigation into the gatekeeperness [sic] of any gatekeeper like Chomsky," then he adds that he "will not presume to answer for you the listener…but I will share my own thinking on this matter…I am not going to come to any grand conclusions about Noam Chomsky's affiliations and who [sic] he may or may not be working for…"
Oh I think he has come to a conclusion, don't you?
After associating Chomsky with the Pentagon because he works at MIT (guilt by association, another propaganda technique), Corbett says that Chomsky "won't look into any of these…underlying areas that would really destabilize the entire political order as we know it, even as he himself admits with such things as 'who cares'"
Another oft-used propaganda technique is to assert the opposite, as Corbett does here. Chomsky does not "admit" that the revelation of a high-level JFK assassination conspiracy would destabilize the state, in fact the entire thrust of his "who cares" argument (whatever one thinks of it) as it is presented here is that such efforts will come to nothing, as he states explicitly in the clip Corbett provides. Here again we see Corbett standing the truth on its head.
Would such a revelation destabilize the political order? Indeed it would. That's why we had another revolution after it was revealed that the government knew that Spain was not responsible for the bombing of the Maine. That's why we had another revolution after FOIA requests revealed that FDR asked Cordell Hull to come up with a plan to induce Japan to attack the US so we could enter the war, and another when it was revealed that our government knew in advance about Pearl Harbor.
We have had it revealed that a sitting president was running a gang of thugs out of the basement of the White House ordering them to break into the offices of the rival political party and this did nothing to destabilize the political order. Nixon just resigned and left and business went on as usual. None of these events destabilized anything. Would identifying JFK's killers? Not likely. The elusive alchemy of revolution has been the subject of endless discourse, I do not claim to understand it, but Corbett's confidence is ahistorical.
Watergate didn't roil the populace, but Vietnam did, the war against which Chomsky campaigned. Perhaps he is right and Corbett is wrong?
Corbett then berates Chomsky, not without cause, for not answering the specific Federal Reserve question which was put to him. But then Corbett slips up. He says that the questioner "is asking about taking that power of printing money back to the people via the treasury."
How illuminating that this anti-statist conflates the government with the people. For all his blather about Chomsky's allegedly contradictory statements it is Corbett himself who issues the only real faux pas.
Corbett: "Chomsky is doing, he's functioning as if he were working hand in hand with the very elite which he proclaims to be fighting against"
Is he? Is Corbett? Both? Neither?
Corbett ends by saying that we don't need to speculate as to on who behalf Chomsky guards those gates. So crescendo yields to anti-climax. No doubt some of his regular listeners were left crestfallen, but prevarication of this type is an essential part of the propagandist's art as if he were to offer a specific accusation then it could be measured against the facts. The unfalsifiable thesis would become commensurable, and that just will not do. It might be useful in determining whether Chomsky is in fact a wolf in sheep's clothing by testing each possibility–he works for the FBI or Mossad etc.–but either Corbett hasn't done this or his efforts have been in vain. Either way it undermines his case.
Is Corbett an anarchist? Fuck no. Is he a spook? The case he makes against Chomsky is long on innuendo and deception and utterly lacking in heft, but does that mean Corbett is a spook? Not necessarily. It is fairly common trait in our species to lash out at people who disagree with you, particularly if the subject is important to the aggrieved. That he possesses substantial propaganda skills and employs them unscrupulously against Chomsky does not in and of itself prove that he's a spook.
Nor does the malicious and infantile nature of his case mean that its fundamental thrust is incorrect.
Is Chomsky a spook? His arguments against the JFK conspiracy theory and 9/11 are impossible to understand. He seems to think that 19 guys with box-cutters could keep the 9/11 plot a secret but trained, professional spooks whose careers and lives depend on it could not. I don't get it. He has defended the Warren Commission Report which suggests that one man, Oswald, fired three shots from the sixth floor of an adjacent building in less than six seconds which caused all the wounds in Kennedy and Connolly. Yet the manufacturer of the weapon in question, a Mannlicher Carcano, stated under oath that his rifle could not have caused the damage attributed to it; Oswald was tested and was found not to have fired a rifle that day; the weight of the fragments removed from Connolly far exceed the mass missing from the bullet which was deemed to have caused all his injuries; and that bullet was tested and was shown not to have been fired by the Mannlicher Carcano; how can anybody believe this shit? Yet Chomsky does, or claims to. If Oswald had survived and was charged the case against him would be laughed out of court, yet Chomsky will not relent.
Why? He has concluded, quite incorrectly in my view, that there would be no motive for the ruling class to kill Kennedy, and thus they did not, regardless of the facts. In support of this theory he adds that no policy changes occurred as a result of his death, an assertion which is demonstrably false. Internationally, America's policies vis-a-vis Cuba, Israel, Yemen, Egypt, Vietnam, and most importantly, the USSR, underwent substantial adjustment. Israel got the bomb, which Kennedy denied them, and began planning the 1967 military operation in January of 1964, two months after Kennedy died. Domestically his policies were even more threatening to the ruling class. Racism was and is the cornerstone of the class war, capital's primary weapon. The elite have employed a two-tier scheme to keep the working class divided going back at least to the 16th century. In what was to become the United States, the division got racialized in the 17th century. Since then the American proletariat has been bifurcated and paralyzed by racism. It does not matter how indifferent Kennedy was to the Civil Rights Movement initially, or how reluctantly he might have come to its banner, or that he was driven to it more by necessity than conviction, rally to it he did. This not only menaced the bourgeoisie with the prospect of interracial working class solidarity, it also jeopardized the long-standing detente between northern and southern capital. The CRM shook this country to its foundation, and the hardliners did not appreciate Kennedy's dovish approach.
And this is not to mention all the government contract money the plutocrats lost when Kennedy unilaterally initiated a ban on atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons…
And there is much, much more, yet Chomsky remains obstinate.
So now it's time to answer the questions posed at the beginning:
Is Corbett a spook? Yes. I have little doubt. I am not so much the megalomaniac to think that I could not be wrong, I am merely reporting the strength of my conviction. The case against Corbett:
This video (and his others on the topic) could function as an instruction manual for students of propaganda. Let's see, we have guilt by association, prefiguring responses, asserting the opposite, straw-manning, name-calling, attributing one's unethical intentions to your target, and of course distorting your target's message. I think Corbett hit all the bases. This is instructive enough, but that he inserts one of the ruling class' hot talking point issues–the minimum wage– into a discussion in which it has no bearing is telling. What are the chances that this was an honest mistake?
Does Corbett believe the case he makes? Is he making an honest attempt to unearth the truth? At one point he says that the CIA recently stated that they have been monitoring Chomsky. Corbett then says that this was done by the Agency to bolster Chomsky's credibility, to give him street creds. Surely anyone looking at this objectively could hardly fail to recognize that this fact has no probative value. If Chomsky is a spook, then indeed this would enhance his status. However, if he is what he purports to be then the state security apparat would be spying on him as it does all revolutionaries. Since the fact fits both theses, it is of no analytical use. Is Corbett not intelligent enough to understand this? Or is he just tarring Chomsky with any feather he can and hoping that his listenership won't recognize the incongruity? The latter is considerably more likely, but either way it discredits him.
Corbett has said that he believes, quite rightly, that JFK was killed in part because he was going to withdraw troops from Vietnam. If this is so, does it not disprove his charge against Chomsky?
Chomsky was part of the successful effort to force the imperialist class out of Vietnam. If it is true that he works for those state forces who killed Kennedy, why would they have their man spearheading the effort to end the war? If the Bureau was running Chomsky, why would they not use him here to gatekeep? If Chomsky had exhorted people to resist the war then did a volte face and urged radicals to support it, then the gatekeeper argument might have some validity, but as it is if one believes Chomsky is a spook then one has to conclude that the oligarchs didn't consider the war important enough to risk exposing their asset. Anyone, like me, who lived through that era will find this interpretation hard to believe. Corbett's JFK-killed-to-escalate-war and Chomsky-is-a-spook theories are in hopeless conflict. Again, is he just not clever enough to see it? Or is it he who is the spook?
Who benefits from Corbett's views? The ruling class. He wants to eliminate the state but not capital. He insists that global warming is a hoax, thereby protecting the oil and coal industries. Corbett contends that what Chomsky says and does supports the powers that be as if he were working for them whether or not he is, but that shoe fits Corbett better than Chomsky. Much better!
Is Chomsky a spook? My guess is no.
There is no defense for his defense of the Warren or 9/11 Commissions' reports. They are ugly statecraft; inhumane, cynical deceptions; abominations easily debunked, yet Chomsky will not denounce them. I don't understand it, but is it evidence that he is gatekeeping? Chomsky does not deny that the state assassinates. As Corbett notes, He is willing to entertain that MLK was executed by state goons because, as he has stated on more than one occasion, MLK was a threat to the elite, so it is plausible that they should want to eliminate him. The core of Chomsky's argument against the Kennedy conspiracy theory is that there was no reason for the ruling class to fear Kennedy. The merits of this stance should not concern us here as the issue of whether Chomsky is an agent of the state hinges upon its sincerity, not its veracity.
As I am not clairvoyant, there will be no attempt to read his mind. So let's approach this question as we would the assassinations themselves and put the "yes" and "no" hypotheses to the test.
If the Bureau is running Chomsky, would they use him to support the lone gunman theory? Chomsky is probably the highest profile anti-capitalist in the country, and certainly the best known anarchist. If the Bureau can occupy that space, would they risk this capital on the JFK assassination? I doubt it. The ruling class control the government, it's theirs, they can/do control prosecutions all the time (Watergate, Iran-Contra etc.), so it seems extremely unlikely that they would jeopardize this asset to protect the conspirators. They would have no need. Even more damaging to the "yes" proposition is that Chomsky is not in denial of Cointelpro, the possibility that MLK was a state target etc. Given that it is extremely probable that the savages who ordered the hits on Fred Hampton, MLK etc. are the same state brutes who ordered the JFK assassination (and, according to the theory espoused by Corbett, the same folks who wanted to escalate the war in Vietnam), Chomsky's position then does not shield anybody. He does not deny that the state kills as befits its interests, he is arguing in favor of some assassination theories and against others. In light of this, the "no" proposition seems to me the more likely.
Moreover, if Chomsky were being used to protect Kennedy's murderers, would they have him saying "who cares!"? Is this an admonition calculated by him and/or his handlers to deflect attention from the controversy? Or is it a spontaneous sigh of exasperation by a man who has long ago tired of this topic? I think that if one were trying to stoke interest in the JFK assassination one would say "who cares!".
I have heard Chomsky say that we do not "know" that the Nazis set the Reichstag fire, is Corbett now willing to assert that Chomsky is working for the fascists?
If Chomsky is a spook, he isn't very good at it, is he?
If the Bureau were running Chomsky (and, according to Corbett's implication, have been so at least as far back as his interview with Marcus), why have they denied him a platform? What is the point of running somebody to deliver a message and then suppressing it? For decades Chomsky was denied access to television audiences (Save for the rare appearance on public television shows like Firing Line in which he was aggressively challenged); his books went unreviewed by major print media; the average American would not recognize him if his image appeared on their milk cartons. For years he was relegated to addressing small audiences at university events and the like. He was persona non grata to the mainstream. It was only since the advent of the internet that he has become widely known. If Chomsky were the Bureau's man, would they not have used him more effectively? Consider, for instance, how ubiquitous author Gerald Posner, who has admitted receiving CIA funding for his book, is in TV documentaries dealing with the JFK assassination. Chomsky too has written a book on the topic, if he were a spook, why has they not used him as they have Posner (and others)?
One might well argue that by censuring him, his handlers establish his bona fides as a revolutionary and they are saving him for the revolutionary moment. If this is so it demolishes Corbett's case, but again here the "no" hypothesis holds more water. Despite what Corbett would have you believe, anarchists are not followers and do not have supporters. We are not lemmings. Should the Glorious Day come during Chomsky's lifetime, and should he on that day reverse himself and urge the risen masses not to smash the state and capital and emancipate ourselves, he would have no effect. Anarchists are, in the main, very independent people. Anyone attempting to block the revolution will quickly be dismissed. Keeping Chomsky off the mainstream media prevents him from establishing himself with the general public, the only people who might succumb to a counterrevolutionary message. If we are to accept that Chomsky is a gatekeeper, it then follows that he would have a mission message, and a target demographic. If the state were running him, they could not believe he could turn the radical Left, just about the only people who would be familiar with him. They must have a different target in mind, but it is precisely this wider audience which they have denied him.
So it seems that if he were a spook, both he and his handlers are bungling the job, and that seems quite unlikely. So it is my guess that the charge that Chomsky is a spook is false.
My guess is that Chomsky's saying that he hoped we can overthrow the state, as he does in the clip Corbett provides, and that that statement received a round of applause, is the genesis of Corbett's slander. The powers that should not be cannot be indifferent to such open challenges to their supremacy, particularly when they are well received. So they set one of their media assets, Comrade Corbett, this task.
However, pseudo-anarchist Corbett is of no consequence, nor for that matter is the real anarchist Chomsky. What does matter is keeping the vision of a world without domination, coercion, and exploitation alive. It doesn't matter whether Corbett is right about Chomsky or I about Corbett; only the march through capitalism and to emancipation, freedom and equality should concern us. Which, as I understand it, is the meaning of Chomsky's "who cares."
This ends this self-indulgence. If anyone is still reading at this point–I thank you. And I would be interested in your thoughts. My e-mail address is in the right column of the blog.
[1] Terry Bouton's Taming Democracy
[2] The best exposition with which I am familiar is Rudolf Rocker's Anarcho-syndicalism, a book endorsed by Chomsky


text:
The Gang's All Here at Mainframe Gallery
I am happy to be included among a fantastic roster of talent for Mainframe Gallery's 2nd Annual Group Show: The Gang's All Here. This show features affordable art with all pieces ranging between $50 - $100. Such a great opportunity to cross some gifts off your list and see some great artwork. The show runs December 13 - January 3 at Mainframe Gallery's new Georgetown location: 5628 Airport Way South, #110, Seattle, WA 98108.
The following two paintings are my contribution to the show. Both pieces are 10" x 10", water soluble oil on canvas.


text:
The Fakenham Community Centre has secured £15,000 of funding from the lottery towards the replacement of its forty-year-old flooring in the building's main hall.
A previous application from North Norfolk council's Big Society Fund had been turned down.
Read more in the article at The Fakenham & Wells Times website.


text:
For a long time, the cure for diabetes type 1 and type 2 has relied on agonizing insulin shots for patients or insulin infusion via mechanical pumps. Regarding this, experts have been creating artificial pancreatic beta cells with the he…
This report studies the global Fashion and Apparels Print Label market status and forecast, categorizes the global Fashion and Apparels Print Label market size (value & volume) by manufacturers, type, application, and region. This report focuses on the top manufacturers in North America, Europe, Japan, China and other regions (India, Southeast Asia, Central & South America, and Middle East & Africa).
The global Fashion and Apparels Print Label market is valued at million US$ in 2017 and will reach million US$ by the end of 2025, growing at a CAGR of during 2018-2025.
The major manufacturers covered in this report
- Avery Dennison
- Bemis
- CCL Industries
- Berry Global
- Cenveo
- Constantia Flexibles
- Hood Packaging
- Intertape Polymer Group
- Karlville Development
- Klckner Pentaplast
- Macfarlane Group
- SleeveCo
- DOW Chemical
Geographically, this report studies the top producers and consumers, focuses on product capacity, production, value, consumption, market share and growth opportunity in these key regions, covering
- North America
- Europe
- China
- Japan
- Southeast Asia
- India
- Other Regions (India, Southeast Asia, Central & South America and Middle East & Africa)
We can also provide the customized separate regional or country-level reports, for the following regions:
- North America
- - United States
- - Canada
- - Mexico
- Asia-Pacific
- - China
- - India
- - Japan
- - South Korea
- - Australia
- - Indonesia
- - Singapore
- - Rest of Asia-Pacific
- Europe
- - Germany
- - France
- - Italy
- - Spain
- - Russia
- - Rest of Europe
- Central & South America
- - Brazil
- - Argentina
- - Rest of South America
- Middle East & Africa
- - Saudi Arabia
- - Turkey
- - Rest of Middle East & Africa
On the basis of product, this report displays the production, revenue, price, market share and growth rate of each type, primarily split into
- Wet Glued Labels
- Pressure Sensitive/Self Adhesive Labels
- Liner-less labels
- Multi-part Barcode Labels
- In-mold labels
- Shrink Sleeve Label
On the basis of the end users/applications, this report focuses on the status and outlook for major applications/end users, consumption (sales), market share and growth rate for each application, including
- Offset Print
- Flexography Print
- Rotogravure Print
- Screen Print
- Letterpress Print
- Digital Print
The study objectives of this report are:
- To analyze and study the global Fashion and Apparels Print Label capacity, production, value, consumption, status (2013-2017) and forecast (2018-2025);
- Focuses on the key Fashion and Apparels Print Label manufacturers, to study the capacity, production, value, market share and development plans in future.
- Focuses on the global key manufacturers, to define, describe and analyze the market competition landscape, SWOT analysis.
- To define, describe and forecast the market by type, application and region.
- To analyze the global and key regions market potential and advantage, opportunity and challenge, restraints and risks.
- To identify significant trends and factors driving or inhibiting the market growth.
- To analyze the opportunities in the market for stakeholders by identifying the high growth segments.
- To strategically analyze each submarket with respect to individual growth trend and their contribution to the market
- To analyze competitive developments such as expansions, agreements, new product launches, and acquisitions in the market
- To strategically profile the key players and comprehensively analyze their growth strategies.
In this study, the years considered to estimate the market size of Fashion and Apparels Print Label are as follows:
- History Year: 2013-2017
- Base Year: 2017
- Estimated Year: 2018
- Forecast Year 2018 to 2025
For the data information by region, company, type and application, 2017 is considered as the base year. Whenever data information was unavailable for the base year, the prior year has been considered.
Key Stakeholders
Fashion and Apparels Print Label Manufacturers
Fashion and Apparels Print Label Distributors/Traders/Wholesalers
Fashion and Apparels Print Label Subcomponent Manufacturers
Industry Association
Downstream Vendors
Available Customizations
With the given market data, QYResearch offers customizations according to the company's specific needs. The following customization options are available for the report:
Regional and country-level analysis of the Fashion and Apparels Print Label market, by end-use.
Detailed analysis and profiles of additional market players.