text:
29 Gorgeous Images of the American Southwest
"The Mittens in Monument Valley probably form one of the most enduring images of the American West, having been featured in dozens of Hollywood classics."
"Colorful hoodoos in Bryce Canyon National Park, Utah."
"Drive to and walk up a short trail to this massive triple arch in Arches National Park."
"Painted Desert in Arizona."
"Route 66, Arizona."
"A towering cliff of red sienna sandstone creates a natural outdoor amphitheater in Northern Colorado."
"Antelope Canyon, Arizona."
"San Geronimo Chapel, Taos Pueblo, Taos, New Mexico. This chapel exemplifies the clean, simple lines of Southwestern architecture."
"Sagebrush at sunset in southern Colorado."
"Ladder to the Clouds, Acoma Pueblo, New Mexico."
"These colorful Indian blankets were photographed at a street market in Santa Fe, New Mexico."
"St. Francis Cathedral in old town Santa Fe, New Mexico."
"I took this photo in Utah on I-70 between I-15 and Richfield overlooking the desert."
"The gorgeous El Santuario de Chimayó along the High Road to Taos, a scenic byway between Santa Fe and Taos, New Mexico."
"Among the many places we visited during our driving trip to the southwest was Capitol Reef National Park. The landscapes were terrific but I particularly liked this shot of a tree highlighted by the sun."
"Beautiful day in Santa Fe."
"Abiquiu, New Mexico sunrise. No, this isn't Photoshop magic. The sunrises in the Southwest really do look like this, which is why artists and photographers are always been drawn to this area."
"Near Four Corners: I took this photo on highway 160 shortly after we passed into Arizona from Colorado and New Mexico."
"San Francisco de Asis Church, Ranchos de Taos, New Mexico, made famous by legendary photographer Ansel Adams and painter Georgia O'Keeffe."
"Canyonlands, The Maze, Chimney Rock."
"Taos Pueblo: Interestingly, Taos Indians (and my guess is all Indians) made entrances to their dwellings from the roof, accessed through ladders (a very common architectural element in pueblo facades)."
"Beautiful sunset at White Sands National Park in New Mexico."
"Taken on a trail in Zion National Park."
"Lovely evening in Phoenix, Arizona."
"Frank Lloyd Wright's Taliesin West in Scottsdale, Arizona."
"Red Rocks of Tucson."
"Sunrise over Bryce Canyon National Park in Utah."
"This spot on the Colorado River is called Horseshoe Bend just a few miles out of Page, Arizona."
"Rainbow Over Anticline, Canyonlands National Park."
America is a beautiful country from sea to shining sea, but nothing is more iconic than the red rocks, adobe structures, and dramatic sunsets of the Southwest. Come along for a photo tour of the amazing vistas of the western states.


text:
The Importance of Coal in America's Energy PortfolioPosted by Michael Tadeo on January 15, 2014
America can count on reliable and affordable electricity from coal for the foreseeable future. This will only happen if the Obama Administration stops its constant attacks on this abundant resource. In 2013, coal provided America with 40% of America's electricity while providing countless direct and indirect jobs. Many communities around the country rely upon coal for their livelihoods. Needless to say, coal is an important part of America's energy portfolio and an all of the above energy policy, that includes coal, is key to making sure the lights always stay on across America.
Take a look at the 10 Reasons Why Coal is Here to Stay, courtesy of Matt Smith at Fuel Fix.
1. Coal has historically been, and is currently, the leading fuel in the US power generation mix. It is also expected to play a leading role for many years to come:
2. In fact, the Department of Energy predicts that energy-related CO2 emissions have risen in 2013 for the first time in three years…likely due to higher coal use.
3. Coal consumption is expected to drop in 2016 due to MATS (Mercury and Air Toxics Standards) – new federal limits on mercury emissions - spurring on the retirement of older coal plants which don't have have emission-control equipment. After 2016, however, coal-fired electricity generation is expected to increase slowly over the next 10 years as the remaining coal-fired capacity is used more intensively.
4. In terms of output, although the US has seen a drop-off in coal production for the Appalachian region, the Interior region has grown, while the Western region has also shown a rising trend until recently. The Department of Energy expects coal production to remain fairly constant over the coming decades:
5. Although there may be a lesser need for output growth in coal to meet US demand, this surplus coal is finding its way abroad, boosting US exports to a record level in 2012 at 114.2 million tons.
6. A white paper released by the EIA last week highlights that more than half of U.S. coal exports are shipped to customers in Europe, while much of the remainder stays within the Americas. Demand is strong and diverse.
That's 18, 700,000,000,000,000 Btus:

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Pelosi Moves to the Fore
By Dan Balz
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's extraordinary accusation that the Bush administration lied to Congress about the use of harsh interrogation techniques dramatically raised the stakes on the growing debate over the Bush administration's anti-terror policies even as it brought troubling new questions about the speaker's credibility.
Pelosi's performance in the Capitol was either a calculated escalation of a long-running feud with the Bush administration or a reckless act by a politician whose word had been called into question. Perhaps it was both.
For the first time, Pelosi acknowledged that in 2003 she was informed by an aide that the CIA had told others in Congress that officials had used waterboarding during interrogations. But she insisted, contrary to CIA accounts, she was not told about waterboarding during a September 2002 briefing by agency officials. Asked whether she was accusing the CIA of lying, she replied, "Yes, misleading the Congress of the United States."
Washington now is engaged in a battle royal of finger-pointing, second-guessing and self-defense, all over techniques President Obama banned in the first days of his administration. Both sides in this debate now believe they have something to prove -- and gain -- by keeping the fight alive. Both sides have champions and villains. Pelosi has become a lightning rod for criticism from conservatives and a hero to the left -- much as former vice president Dick Cheney has become the target of the left and the darling of many on the right.
The speaker's charges about the CIA's alleged deception and her own shifting accounts of what she knew and when she knew it will likely add to calls for some kind of independent body to investigate this supercharged issue -- much as Obama and many members of Congress would like to avoid a wholesale unearthing of the past at a time when their plates are full with pressing concerns.
Closing the books on the Bush years has proven harder than anyone imagined -- certainly harder than Obama had hoped. The intensifying argument over what the CIA told Pelosi and when comes on top of the debate over whether any Bush administration officials should face legal action for their role in authorizing or implementing those policies and whether a national commission is needed to get to the truth.
The speaker's discomfort was evident yesterday as she was grilled by reporters for the first time since the CIA issued information suggesting that she and others were told about the use of these techniques, including waterboarding, at a classified briefing on Sept. 4, 2002. Pelosi was the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee at the time.
The CIA said the briefing included Pelosi and then-Florida Rep. Porter Goss, who was Intelligence Committee chairman at the time and later became CIA director. Two House aides also attended. The CIA account said the subject was enhanced interrogation techniques and the particular techniques used on Abu Zubaydah.
Five months later, on Feb, 5, 2003, after Pelosi had left the intelligence committee, the CIA briefed the chairman and ranking member on the detainee interrogation program. Pelosi said her aide Michael Sheehy, who attended that briefing as well as the September briefing, told her that agency officials said they had used waterboarding in some cases. "He said that the committee Chair and Ranking Member and appropriate staff had been briefed that these techniques were now being used," she said yesterday. "That's all I was informed."
Conservatives say that, if she was so opposed to torture, she should have spoken out forcefully when she learned that these techniques were being employed. Her failure to do so then leaves her in a weakened position to protest now, they argue. An op-ed article by former Bush White House senior adviser Karl Rove in yesterday's Wall Street Journal asked directly, "So is the speaker of the House lying about what she knew and when? And if so, what will Democrats do about it?"
Pelosi gave some ground on the question of whether she had been informed that waterboarding was being used -- though by her account she did not learn this until February 2003, rather than 2002, and then only from an aide after the CIA had briefed other lawmakers on the intelligence committees. Instead of registering her protest to the administration, she said, she set out to help Democrats win control of Congress and elect a Democrat as president.
But in attempting to defend herself, she took the remarkable step of trying to shift the focus of blame to the CIA and the Bush administration, claiming the CIA records represented a diversionary tactic from the real debate over the interrogation policies. That amounted to a virtual declaration of war against the CIA at a time when the Obama administration already has rattled morale at the agency with the release of Justice Department memos authorizing the harsh interrogation techniques.
House Republican Leader John Boehner was quick to challenge Pelosi. Within minutes of her contentious press conference, he emerged to question her accusations. He left no doubt that Republicans believe the speaker has made a major misstep that will hurt her and perhaps her party as this controversy plays out.
The various parties all have their own priorities now. Pelosi not only wants to clear her name but also favors a truth commission to answer questions about how the interrogation policies came to be and whether they were as effective as Cheney and others claim. Cheney is determined to defend the policies he helped shape and force the new administration into a different posture on its anti-terror policies. The outside groups, and the grassroots activists they speak for, are prepared to continuing litigating the Bush presidency.
Obama has already moved on his own policies, having decided to fight public release of photos showing U.S. soldiers abusing prisoners after earlier saying he favored their release. He cited potential danger for U.S. soldiers that could be caused by the photos' release, but he almost must have concluded that the photos would set off another storm at home as well.
The president wants the focus kept on the future and the energies of his entire administration, from the CIA to the Defense Department to the relevant committees on Capitol Hill, engaged in producing an effective policy in Afghanistan and sorting through such difficult questions as what to do with the detainees at Guantanamo once that facility is closed next year.
Pelosi is not out of the woods. She could have saved herself some trouble by admitting earlier that she has been informed that the CIA was using waterboarding. By doing what she did yesterday, she has assured that she will remain a central character in the political fight that is now raging. But whether by design or accident, she also succeeded in enlarging a controversy that is no longer a sideshow.
Staff researcher Alice Crites contributed to this report.
Web Politics Editor
May 14, 2009; 7:20 PM ET
Categories: Dan Balz's Take
Save & Share: Previous: Credit Card Practices Topic A at Obama Town Hall
Next: POTUS Events: World Series Champs
What the Pelosi lie opens up, is Obama's own loopholes allowing worse torture.
He wants it concluded quickly. (There is no Congress between him and his mandate).
It is as bad as praying Catholics being arrested on Notre Dame property....another act of the devil.
Congress needs to remove Obama for NPD sociopathic profile, before he allowed the powers of Hitler.
Posted by: dottydo | May 16, 2009 8:15 PM | Report abuse
What the Pelosi lie opens up, is Obama's own loopholes allowing worse torture.
He wants it concluded quickly.
It is as bad as praying Catholics being arrested on Notre Dame property....and actof the devil.
Congress needs to remove Obama for NPD sociopathic profile, before he allowed the powers of Hitler.
Posted by: dottydo | May 16, 2009 8:12 PM | Report abuse
I was going to write something but what is the use of piling on Pelosi. She is doing it to herself.
Posted by: danielhancock | May 16, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse
Note to previous comment. James Webb (D-VA) serves in the Senate so he would not be eligible to be Speaker of the House.
Posted by: danielhancock | May 16, 2009 9:39 AM | Report abuse
I trust Panetta more than I trust Pelosi, I trust Republicans in congress less than either of them.
Posted by: JRM2 | May 15, 2009 3:23 PM | Report abuse
"First, the P.O.W. is not a terrorist and especially not a terrorist who has information with respect to a ticking time bomb."
Not to mention that if you suspect there is a "ticking time bomb" then why do you use a method that takes a month to provide no more intelligence than was already given through conventional means?
Posted by: JRM2 | May 15, 2009 3:22 PM | Report abuse
"They took out Martha Stewart for a much less egregious lie.
They took out William Jefferson Clinton for a little wild willey white lie.
They took out Nixon for a lie.
Posted by: dottydo | May 14, 2009 11:01 PM"
dottydo, the distinction here is that Stewart, Clinton and Nixon all lied under oath.
Posted by: JRM2 | May 15, 2009 3:16 PM | Report abuse
"In view of the concern to our security after 911, waterboarding (only three, I understand) was not out of order. We needed to know of possible future terrorist plans, lest thousands more Americans die. The democrats need to learn some sense and morals obligations, and this includes Pelosi.
Posted by: Billw3 | "
Bill, I agree with you in some regard, however, as more information comes out it appears that the purpose for torture in these instances was to elicit a false confession to make a link between Al Qaeda and Sadaam Hussein, if that is in fact true then we have a serious problem on our hands.
Posted by: JRM2 | May 15, 2009 3:11 PM | Report abuse
"If Pelosi really thought that waterboarding was torture, and did nothing, she is more guilty than the Bush and Chaney, who thought nothing was wrong with it. Intent is everything when a crime is committed. As the head of Congress, and second in line to be president, she should of called a press conference to mention the point then, not after she was caught.
Posted by: SavedGirl | "
What twisted logic! and BTW it's "Cheney" not "Chaney", and one more thing, Joe Biden is 2nd in line to the Presidency.
Posted by: JRM2 | May 15, 2009 3:07 PM | Report abuse
With Panetta's comments today, it appears that Nancy has really stepped in it.
So Repubs, maybe we get a new speaker, how about someone like Jim Webb, someone who is not afraid to stand up for what is right.
Who would you rather have, someone you can demonize with no backbone?, or someone like Jim Webb, who isn't afraid to put the feet to the fire?
Posted by: JRM2 | May 15, 2009 3:04 PM | Report abuse
"You want to see pictures of what we do? Do you also wan t graphics of what the enemy does?"
The distinction is we are supposed to be a nation of laws, of moral high-ground and we are not to become "like them"
Posted by: JRM2 | May 15, 2009 3:01 PM | Report abuse
why is it so important to punish people who thought they were doing right,60-70% of people polled don't think it's wrong either
why don't we move forward
Posted by: dizzo49198 | May 15, 2009 2:43 PM | Report abuse
pelosi needs to stop, there are alot of good people that could use the oxygen she consuming.
Posted by: sinnersunited | May 15, 2009 12:55 PM | Report abuse
Both sides are crazy to think that they have anything to gain in this fracas. If Pelosi falls from this, Democrats will have less reason not to hold extensive hearings. The Democrats have little to gain except that more leading Democrats will be smeared and the country will be distracted.
War is a dirty but sometimes necessary business. Daniel Inouye, has admitted in Burns' documentary on WWII that his unit in Italy killed wounded German prisoners. Should we also investigate him to maintain Obama's misbegotten notion that America has a pure tradition in war?
Posted by: gproach | May 15, 2009 12:13 PM | Report abuse
Suggestion: Inside the beltway by beltway insiders continues to be confused with inside America. Solution: Have Pelosi and Cheney square off in a debate sponsored by the League of Women Voters of any town that's just lost its Chrysler franchise dealership....and see if anyone shows up with "waterboarding in 2002/03" as the priority on their minds....It's all about unemployment; incumbents let our financial and economic trains go off the track; It's your last wake-up call y'all: middle class America is giving you one chance to fix it or we'll forget your seniority along with your petty squabbles.
It's so predictable how off-course politicians of both stripes can get when Beltway egos trump common sense priorities.
The choice is really quite obvious: put the train back on the track or we'll clean out both houses of Congress at the earliest opportunity.
A frustrated electorate deserves better and will get it one way or the other.
Posted by: jkudless | May 15, 2009 11:14 AM | Report abuse
Damn, but war is messy. Certainly not for candy@$$es like liberal yahoos. All mouth and marches, not exactly a Marine hike. Yet, they know so much on how to fight the foe. Just ask any of the armchair liars.
Let the military and CIA do their job and the job will be done a whole lot more efficiently. Water boarding is torture? They still have their fingernails intact and their left butt wiping hand is still attached. No burning, maiming, or drilling though the skull, or needles in the eye.
You want to see pictures of what we do? Do you also wan t graphics of what the enemy does?
Those that have no concept of the Geneva convention nor do they care, are who we are at war with. Those that leak or purposely tell all and put our military and our nation at greater risk are traitors. Nancy, Speaker of the lies would most definitely sucumb to water boarding.
Posted by: Emily14 | May 15, 2009 11:03 AM | Report abuse
to ahartnack.....the only stupid people are someone like you...and Jake D...you just are so blind, our County has been taken apart by the B U S H & C H E N E Y Company...if we don't keep trying to educate morons we as a nation are doomed, thank little georgie the number One Moron who allowed C H E N E Y TO make him the puppet. So long America and hello 3rd world country...it is not that we deserve it but...what.....8 years of cheating lies and downright raping and piliging of our County and you want to blame Pelosi, I have some broken down bridges and overpasses for you my dear...
Posted by: janetmramos | May 15, 2009 10:50 AM | Report abuse
How would have thought that the trio of Pelosi/Cheney/Rove would hijack the news for the weekend?
Posted by: parkerfl1 | May 15, 2009 9:27 AM | Report abuse
I trust the Speaker FAR more than I do any CIA goon.
Or, any General for that matter.
Posted by: kase | May 14, 2009 7:50 PM
Good boy!
You are the kind of people the DemocRATS depend on to get them elected.
Blind and stoopid.
Keep electing them.
Posted by: ahartnack | May 15, 2009 7:17 AM | Report abuse
I told you.
It's all Bush's fault and it'll be Bush's fault even if it is our fault.
Case closed.
Posted by: ahartnack | May 15, 2009 7:13 AM | Report abuse
If Pelosi really thought that waterboarding was torture, and did nothing, she is more guilty than the Bush and Chaney, who thought nothing was wrong with it. Intent is everything when a crime is committed. As the head of Congress, and second in line to be president, she should of called a press conference to mention the point then, not after she was caught.
Posted by: SavedGirl | May 15, 2009 1:27 AM | Report abuse
"All three were nicer people than the spoiled luxury jet flying power abuser"
Pelosi is a sixty-some year old spoiled brat.
Posted by: Billw3 | May 14, 2009 11:33 PM | Report abuse
Talk to yourself the same way.
Both Partys suck.
Neither listened to the people.
Change your party affiliation to Independent with everyone else sick of both Party loansharking bank butlickers, and take away their electoral college.
No more pendulum between two scumbag filled parties.
Make a party of the people, where the one with big money or family ties gets no vote.
Posted by: dottydo | May 14, 2009 11:30 PM | Report abuse
In view of the concern to our security after 911, waterboarding (only three, I understand) was not out of order. We needed to know of possible future terrorist plans, lest thousands more Americans die. The democrats need to learn some sense and morals obligations, and this includes Pelosi.
Regardless, waterboarding does not compare to having one's head chopped off.
Posted by: Billw3 | May 14, 2009 11:27 PM | Report abuse
Let's weigh it out..
Yup ,she is a liar. Bye Bye , now who was on the committee that ALSO NEW AND APPROVED IT?
Posted by: dottydo | May 14, 2009 11:26 PM | Report abuse
Why are the liberals so angry? They won, yet they keep living in the past in order to feed their irrational hatred. Time to grow up and Move On. You'd be ashamed if you were mature enough to understand the concept of shame. It appears that the left is in a quagmire of their own design and construction. This bunch of unhinged lunatics are still upset about 2000! Get over it. Grow up.
Posted by: chefdaniel1 | May 14, 2009 11:21 PM | Report abuse
Whoa whoa whoa whoa everybody.
Nancy Pelosi is like 87 years old and probably doesn't remember all the hearings where she was told about the waterboarding and didn't object.
That's not technically a lie, it just means she's senile.
Posted by: Ombudsman1
I thought both Pelosi and Daniel Inouye died a long time ago, and that they are just stuffed and animated by the Disney people who got fired ,because they were evil.
She used to be mommy Pelosi...but that changed as her lies grew into "all the time",then she became.... Mummy Pelosi.
She didn't forget.
The next liar caught will be Obama aka citizen of Indonesia Barry Soreto
Ted Steven's case is forcing all politicians with closed court documents to become transparent.
This is probably verging on being the best shape the Country has been in a long time.
Change your party affiliation to Independent Party ,and lean neither left or right. Break their electoral college power and make it Independent's who sit on the HIll.
I don't remember should have been the first words out of her mouth, but they weren't hard to play dead and give up the power I guess. She lied so much ,she just thought she would get by with it.
You were aware of her recently uncovered property scandalmaking the hubby a chit load of cash.....oppps there is another lie...she has a pattern of it.
Posted by: dottydo | May 14, 2009 11:16 PM | Report abuse
Maybe Nancy is crazy like a fox...
and she will use her "memory lapse" to lure the GOP into accepting a full investigation into the Bush-Cheney Reign of Terror.
Yes! Let's get to the bottom of Nancy's "lies"...
...along with the lies and criminal actions of those who CONTINUE to administer "the torture matrix" AT HOME and abroad...
...ongoing human rights abuses enabled by the naivete of liberals -- and a compliant mainstream media:
OR (if link is corrupted / disabled);
Posted by: scrivener50 | May 14, 2009 11:16 PM | Report abuse
dastubbs: loosen your foil hat, take your meds and see a physician about your recto-cranial inversion. Your fantasy world is encroaching on reality. You have fallen into the liberal abyss of idiocy. Lay off the kool ade stubbs, you sound like my four year grandchild.
Posted by: chefdaniel1 | May 14, 2009 11:15 PM | Report abuse
They took out Martha Stewart for a much less egregious lie.
They took out William Jefferson Clinton for a little wild willey white lie.
They took out Nixon for a lie.
All three were nicer people than the spoiled luxury jet flying power abuser (in her husbands profits too)....Pelosi
Pelosi lies if her mouth is moving, but finally got caught in the big one.
Posted by: dottydo | May 14, 2009 11:01 PM | Report abuse
Realistically and shamefully, for all our sakes is the spectacle of Nancy Pelosi and her unbridled and unrestrained denial of the truth.
Her denial and CIA accusations should provoke us all to be fearful the country is imploding from within, because of the diasters caused by our Democrat members of Congress. Our own Government should not be the enemy!
Obviously, We all need to be ridgidly honest with each other or we all perish. I hope the CIA doesn't fail to vigorously defend itself for the good of the nation and our continued safety!
Posted by: USDefender | May 14, 2009 10:46 PM | Report abuse
If President Obama believes Nancy Pelosi that the CIA illegally tortured and lied and deceived Congressional leaders about it then the President must launch an investigation and bring the torturers and liars to trial. If he believes that Pelosi is lying to the country then he needs to demand that she step down from her position of leadership. What will he do?
Posted by: valwayne | May 14, 2009 10:26 PM | Report abuse
Sounds to me like the Bush team has the goods on Reid and Pelosi, and that would explain a lot of the actions of these two over the past two years.
They got swept up in the hysteria after 911 and didn't object when they should have objected when Bush used them for a CYA tool in the torture and wiretapping meetings.
I think a truth commission is an excellent idea. A special prosecutor would be an even better idea. And if what I suspect about Reid and Pelosi's complacency in the Bush crimes is correct, then these two need to share a cell next to Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove.
Posted by: MorganaLeFay | May 14, 2009 10:14 PM | Report abuse
This is outrageous and she has no business being speaker of the House. She is in the tangled web she wove for herself. This administration has one liar or cheat one after another.
Posted by: kalamere | May 14, 2009 10:08 PM | Report abuse
Quoting georgedixon:
Time for a Special Prosecutor!
There is nothing to fear from the truth...unless your lie is on record first.
I agree totally.
A special prosecutor should be given carte blanche to investigate everything related to Bush Administration torture policy.
We need to know who knew about these illegal acts, who was briefed on them, who authorized them and who issued the orders.
Republicans will be going to jail.
Posted by: dastubbs | May 14, 2009 9:40 PM | Report abuse
The Speaker is an ego-centric partisan.......she has lied to save her position.....
The left cannot assimilate the obvious, but her changing stories are easy for normal folks to grasp.
Time for a Special Prosecutor!
There is nothing to fear from the truth...unless your lie is on record first.
Posted by: georgedixon | May 14, 2009 9:21 PM | Report abuse
"This is the heighth of absurdity! Instead of fixing the multitude of serious problems that this country faces, the Democrats are on a witch hunt to show the Bush administration abused a few terrorists. Quit muddying the waters with this. MOVE ON and do something productive!!"
Prosecuting felons is always productive!
Posted by: thrh | May 14, 2009 9:21 PM | Report abuse
The Speaker is an ego-centric partisan.......she has lied to save her position.....
The left cannot assimilate the obvious, but her changing stories are easy for normal folks to grasp.
Time for a Special Prosecutor!
There is nothing to fear from the truth...unless your lie is on record first.
Posted by: georgedixon | May 14, 2009 9:21 PM | Report abuse
Oh boy. This is gonna get ugly. For republicans.
No matter which road republicans take - whether it's defending torture or pointing fingers at Pelosi - this is going to end very badly for them.
As more details slowly leak out, it appears that the Bush Administration was torturing Muslims while telling the Congress that they were not doing so (while at the same time claiming they had "legal authority" to do so).
Now there's a news report out today that U.S. intelligence officers in Iraq were directed by Cheney's "office" to use waterboarding on Sadam Hussein's former chief of security to determine whether there was any link between Saddam and the attacks on 9/11. If that charge can be proven, that's what Cheney will go to jail for.
Here's why: we went to war against Iraq over the issue of WMD. But we couldn't find any WMD: no nuclear weapons program, no stockpiles of deadly chemicals and thus no justificiation for invading Iraq.
So Cheney allegedly ordered the torture of an Iraqi detainee to find a link between Saddam and 9/11. But the Bush Administration's own "memo" authorizing torture said it could only be used if there was an "imminent threat". If Cheney ordered torture to be used to find a justification for the Iraq war, that would be a crime he may be charged with. And convicted of. And go to jail for.
So now we understand Cheney's "speaking tour." He's not defending the "little guy." He's apparently attempting to defend himself from prosecution.
I simply cannot understand the tactics of congressional republicans. It seems to me they're in a very poor position to be making a big fuss about "what Pelosi knew and when she knew it." As if Pelosi's alleged "lying" about what she knew might afford them some sort of moral high ground in arguing that torture works.
It seems to me republicans should be keeping their mouths shut about the entire mess. The more they shout and finger-point at democrats, the more democrats are going to call their bluff and start the criminal investigations.
For each day republicans shrilly defend torture, the chances of republicans ending up in jail increases exponentially.
I just don't see any way this can end well for them.
Posted by: dastubbs | May 14, 2009 9:21 PM | Report abuse
The ranking GOP House member just pulled a Boehner today when he said the ends justifies the means, that if torture produces actionable intelligence then it's OK. He just joined himself to Cheney's hip.
Pelosi was in a box - she was sworn to maintain the highest level of confidentiality on what she was told in the briefing. Had she said anything publicly against the torture methods Republicans would have howled for her to be put on trial for revealing classified information.
Would Bush, Cheney et al have listened to her if she'd written to protest against EITs? Well, how much did they do once Jane Harmon did write a protest letter in 2003, after Pelosi had left the Intelligence Committee?
Is the CIA incapable of lying to Congress and/or the American people? The answer to that is a "Slam Dunk."
Posted by: can8tiv | May 14, 2009 9:19 PM | Report abuse
National Security. That's the reason that covers all bases. Let's suppose President Cheney wanted to justify an invasion of Iraq. Let's suppose a P.O.W. may have information that links Saddam Hussein with Osama bin Laden. Let's suppose the P.O.W. won't say the words that establish the link. Will President Cheney authorize waterboarding the P.O.W.? First, the P.O.W. is not a terrorist and especially not a terrorist who has information with respect to a ticking time bomb. Second, justifying an unnecessary war does not rise to the level of National Security unless you conflate the political security of the elected government with National Security. Third, waterboarding is torture and torture is illegal. Fourth, CIA briefings to select members of Congress are classified. What passes between Congress and the spy agency is sacrosanct. Therefore, unless there are notes from or are video/audio tapes of the briefings, it comes down to he said she said. By the time Pelosi was supposedly informed by CIA about waterboarding not having yet been used, it had been used several dozen times. Seems like there is some lying going on, no?
Posted by: BlueTwo1 | May 14, 2009 9:17 PM | Report abuse
What? A Democrat caught in a lie and trying to furiously back pedal while blaming everyone else?
The Devil you say!!!!
Welcome Speaker Pelosi...there's plenty of room under Obama's bus.
Posted by: luca_20009 | May 14, 2009 9:16 PM | Report abuse
I know exactly what Bush and the republicans would have said if Pelosi or and democrat disagreed with them. Anti-American. Just like they did everything they wanted more money approved for the Iraq war. If you don't give us more money for the war, your anti-American, you don't support the troops. Remember all that line of bull by the republicans every time they got EVERYTHING THERE WAY. Who care if Pelosi knew or not..does anyone think Bush and Cheney would have listened to her. This is a joke, and the republicans are once again the butt of the joke.
Posted by: kubrickstan | May 14, 2009 9:11 PM | Report abuse
Florida Representative Porter Goss was at that first briefing too. Is he not being pilloried for covering-up crime of torture because he is a Republican? Since he later became CIA director, the weight of guilt lies much heavier on him.
This tired trick of misdirection by the GOP needs to be called for what it is: lies and distortions to take the heat off the real war criminals, Bush and Cheney.
Posted by: biblioid-ctblogs | May 14, 2009 9:06 PM | Report abuse
You know, if this Pelosi thing had not come up, can you imagine Cheney or any other Republican shouting "show the documents! Get it all out there! Let's investigate!"
No way. But by making Pelosi the lightening rod, by demanding she be investigated, they are bringing on the investigation of Cheney, Bush, Yoo, Addington, et al.
Which is great, because otherwise they would have been on air 24/7 saying everyone should look the other way about what happened under Bush.
Maybe this is all a feint from Pelosi. I look forward to the public revelations of just what transpired when Cheney turned America into a nation that tortures.
Posted by: hitpoints | May 14, 2009 9:01 PM | Report abuse
You are totally crazed if you believe that Pelosi has become a "hero" to the left.
Most of us have wanted her gone for ages. Where the hell have you been?
Posted by: buzzsaw1 | May 14, 2009 9:01 PM | Report abuse
she is a dirty hypocrite
Posted by: djrhood | May 14, 2009 8:59 PM | Report abuse
From a standpoint of legality, if Pelosi sent a staff member to be briefed by the CIA, and if the CIA briefed the staff member, Pelosi is just as much responsible for that briefing, legally, as if she herself were briefed. This is a legal doctrine known as "constructive knowledge". Pelosi would only be "constructing" her own demise, legally, if she were to attempt to prosecute others on the basis of having approved of these tactics when she herself is apparently complicit. Her credibility is zero on this, and I say this speaking as a centrist/liberal Democrat.
Posted by: ripvanwinkleincollege | May 14, 2009 8:56 PM | Report abuse
Lair, Lair, Lair
Posted by: astenv | May 14, 2009 8:53 PM | Report abuse
Whoa whoa whoa whoa everybody.
Nancy Pelosi is like 87 years old and probably doesn't remember all the hearings where she was told about the waterboarding and didn't object.
That's not technically a lie, it just means she's senile.
I see senile folks all the time saying stuff that doesn't make sense, claiming they were still a POW in the Spanish-American war, tell me how they went west on a prarie schooner, and how they don't remember being told about waterboarding when they sat on the committee as it was explained to them.
I don't think it's very nice to call her out on lying like that, either. She's just too old to remember at this point.
Posted by: Ombudsman1 | May 14, 2009 8:48 PM | Report abuse
Tick...tick...tick...that is the sound of time running out on Pelosi.
Posted by: MPNangle | May 14, 2009 8:40 PM | Report abuse
Have to disagree with you there. When were the Democrats able to stop ANYTHING Bush wanted to do during the previous eight years? Bush ignored the opposition completely whenever he could. His entire line of thought was that if he won by more than a vote or two he had given away too much.
He'd absolutely have ignored Pelosi.
Posted by: jcrozier1 | May 14, 2009 8:31 PM | Report abuse
With all of the monumental problems this country is experiencing, it is absurd that we're escalating this issue to another major, partisan political battle. Move on, people.
Posted by: buddrs | May 14, 2009 8:30 PM | Report abuse
Just being a women doesn't make a person innocent of crime. It isn't dumping on woman, it is expecting the same from all of our congress people. By the way, I am a woman, and an independent, perhaps that is why I see the issue differntly then those with partisan ties.
Yes, I do believe Bush would have stopped the practice if Pelosi had done something. He really wouldn't have had a choice if she had done her job. Further since she did nothing we really can't know. Much along the lines of Obama saying the detainee treatment wasn't proved to have given information because it can't be proved at all. It is total conjecture that she could do nothing and it was her responibilty to try if she believed it was torture.
Posted by: win1 | May 14, 2009 8:29 PM | Report abuse
Nobody who was briefed on Torture AT ALL and failed to raise a HUGE stink and go public is a "hero" to us on the left. That includes Pelosi.
Unlike the right, we think torture is wrong. We actually get ashamed when we find out torture is being used. We don't brag about it like those on the right.
Intellectual consistency.
ANYONE, Democrat or Republican, who helped turn the U.S. into a country who tortures should be removed from office and prosecuted.
Posted by: jcrozier1 | May 14, 2009 8:25 PM | Report abuse
Nancy, are you hearing footsteps yet?
Posted by: VinsonDaly | May 14, 2009 8:24 PM | Report abuse
Lying well used to be a job requirement for the CIA. It certainly was in the 60-80s when they used mis-information and bribes to bring down democratically elected governments and prop up dictators...aka Shah of Iran.
On the other hand, Pelosi clearly spoke before she had all her facts straight.
What seems to have happened here is that executive branch under GW pressured the CIA to use "enhanced" interrogation and fudge the details with Congress. This kind of thing is much more dangerous than terrorism over the long-term because it empowers the President with king-like powers. We've been here before. Read your US Constitution, not just the Bill of Rights!
Posted by: YoungAtheart | May 14, 2009 8:24 PM | Report abuse
This is the heighth of absurdity! Instead of fixing the multitude of serious problems that this country faces, the Democrats are on a witch hunt to show the Bush administration abused a few terrorists. Quit muddying the waters with this. MOVE ON and do something productive!!
You wanted change!! Fix the problems that the vast majority of Americans care about! The Economy/Jobs, Health Care, the Wars in Irag/Afghanistan, Global Warming, etc.
This is pathetic...
Posted by: whatup1 | May 14, 2009 8:23 PM | Report abuse
Well, I do hope Pelosi does up the anti. After all, this is about Bush, not about her. Bush's name is the one on the bottom line.
Posted by: Here2day | May 14, 2009 8:22 PM | Report abuse
*Surf* boarding.
That's what they told her, honest.
Posted by: johnr5436 | May 14, 2009 8:19 PM | Report abuse
Dumping on a female for male sins--this is such a sexist lynchmob attack on Pelosi, the first female speaker--like the CIA lost toture tapes, and got us into the Iraq war--but lets dump on a female
Posted by: Noahark | May 14, 2009 8:15 PM | Report abuse
Based on the posts, I assume you guys know as little about politicians as you do about CIA employees. A CIA employee is 200 times more reliable than a politician.
Posted by: thelaw1 | May 14, 2009 8:01 PM | Report abuse
How come the story is about Pelosi? She did not authorize or vote for torture. The briefing she received, regardless of whether it was accurate or not, was classified. Surely no one thinks that Bush would have stopped the practice if she complained? I can imagine Cheney saying, "oh my yes Nancy that is terrible, we will stop doing it right now!" Get real. Quit harassing Pelosi and go after the real criminals.
Posted by: cdierd1944 | May 14, 2009 7:59 PM | Report abuse
Ms. Pelosi has become a source of torture! Can we please have her removed?? It was TORTURE during her press conference on May 14! Her staff should remind her that when one is telling the truth, they do not have to consistently refer to their notes! WHAT AN ABSOLUTE EMBARRASSMENT for the office and the Democratic Party. She does not have the good sense to SHUT UP!!
Posted by: wheeljc | May 14, 2009 7:59 PM | Report abuse
Pelosi apparently doesn't understand that if she knew "torture" was planned or had been committed then she has been complacent and under international law she is guilty as well from what I have read. The Convention Against Torture specifically says "1. Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture."
Another words, if you have knowledge and do nothing you have been complicit in the participation of torture.
This may work as the way to get rid of Congress.
Posted by: win1 | May 14, 2009 7:56 PM | Report abuse
Pelosi should stand down and Cheney, Rumsfeld, Yoo, Bybee, Bush, Addington, Rove, Bremer, et al should be endicted for the following:
Politicizong the Justice Department
Lying in the State of The Union address to sell an unneeded and illegal so-called pre-emptive invasion of Iraq.
Treasonously outing a covert CIA agent working on anti-Iranian WMD programs
Wanton violation of the Geneva Accords
Posted by: onestring | May 14, 2009 7:50 PM | Report abuse
I trust the Speaker FAR more than I do any CIA goon.
Or, any General for that matter.
Posted by: kase | May 14, 2009 7:50 PM | Report abuse
If this is what it takes to de-rail socialism, so be it.
Posted by: JakeD | May 14, 2009 7:36 PM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.


text:
Hi all
I have to move data from test environment to production.
we have 2 schema (1.Dev and 2.Prod)
All our datas are in "Dev" schema.
Now we need to move it in to Prod schema..
Tables are already existing in Prod schema..
What I need to do is
1)Just move all the data from Dev to Prod
2)Delete all the data from Dev
note : I dont want to use the command insert into prod.table_name select * from dev.table_name;
reason is we have more than 500 tables in database. so I wanted to move all the table datas with out specifying the table names individually.
Other details ==> Oracle 10g on windows server 2003 .Connecting oracle using Toad 9.1
please helpme on this..
Thanks in advance


text:
Video of the Week: Highlander Dead-Stick Take-Off
Recommend a Video | VOTW Archive
"You're gonna love this," wrote AVweb reader Scott Evans by way of introduction to this week's featured viral video. "We've all heard of dead-stick landings � now check out this dead-stick take-off!" We're not sure what the backstory is on this clip � is that actually Bob Hoover narrating? � but it's worth a look:
Don't see a video screen?
Try disabling ad blockers and refreshing this page.
If that doesn't work, click here to download the video directly.
Don't forget to send us links to any interesting videos you find out there. If you're impressed by it, there's a good chance other AVweb readers will be too. And if we use a video you recommend on AVweb, we'll send out an official AVweb baseball cap as a "thank you."


text:
MIAMI GARDENS, Fla. -- Jaime Penedo made his LA Galaxy debut on Thursday as he made two saves while keeping a scoreless second half in LA's 2-0 defeat to AC Milan.
As Milan pushed to add to their lead, the Panamanian 'keeper was confident in the box and displayed some impressive moves as he kept the Italian giants scoreless. The Italians' were inside the Galaxy half of the field for a majority of the half, but their best chance came in the 85th minute when a shot by Sulley Muntari rattled the cross bar after beating Penedo.
Following the match, Galaxy head coach Bruce Arena was pleased with his new 'keeper's performance.
"I thought that he did well," said Arena. "He had a couple tough saves, but I thought for his first outing and not knowing any of his teammates, he did quite well."
As for any chance that Penedo could earn a starting role with the Galaxy from the get go, Arena was quick to put the brakes on the idea that any decision had been made.
"We'll see," said Arena. "He's been with us just a couple of days. We haven't made any decisions yet."


text:
Remember me
Your shopping cart is empty
Visit the shop
Home | Terms | Privacy | Disclaimer | Policies
The information contained in this Website should not be construed as medical advice. If you are ill you should consult a health professional. Unless otherwise indicated,FortiFood products have not been tested in official clinical trials for efficacy in the prevention or treatment of disease, and should therefore not replace any medicine.
© 2010 - 2018 FortiFood Health Services (Pty) Ltd. | All rights reserved


text:
Thunder survive Rockets' rally
Russell Westbrook relishes the moments when an opponent challenges him and his Oklahoma City Thunder teammates and it becomes time to respond.
Rookie Patrick Beverley showed a willingness to go toe-to-toe with the Thunder's All-Star point guard, and the Houston Rockets didn't back down despite a 15-point deficit in the fourth quarter.
Then it was up to Westbrook and the Thunder to come up with an answer.
Westbrook and Kevin Durant each scored 29 points, and Oklahoma City recovered after squandering its big lead to beat Houston 105-102 on Wednesday night and take a 2-0 series lead.
"It's fun. During this time of the year, as a team we've got one goal and we can't let nobody get in the way," Westbrook said. "That's how I feel and that's how I want my team to respond as well."
Durant hit the go-ahead 3-pointer with 2:28 to play after the Rockets had turned a 15-point deficit into a four-point lead, and the Thunder didn't relinquish the lead. Durant missed a free throw with 1 second left, but Houston was out of timeouts and Carlos Delfino couldn't connect on a desperation shot at the final buzzer.
"It's frustrating and it hurts really bad right now," said Chandler Parsons, who scored 17 points for Houston. "But you've got to take some positives out of it. It's a long series."
Game 3 is Saturday night in Houston.
The Thunder's big lead melted away with nine straight empty possessions as the Rockets mixed in a zone defense. James Harden spearheaded a 21-2 Houston comeback by getting into the lane to create his own opportunities, and he also kicked the ball out to set up two 3-pointers by Delfino. His second 3, from the right wing, provided a 95-91 lead with 3:27 to go.
But the Rockets couldn't keep it up.
Oklahoma City came back to tie it before Harden knifed to the basket for a layup to give Houston its last lead at 97-95 with 2:42 to play. Durant answered right away with a deep 3 from the left wing at the opposite end, and the Thunder came up with back-to-back stops before Thabo Sefolosha's 3 provided a little breathing room at 101-97.
Serge Ibaka added a long jumper to make it 103-98 after Durant was forced to give up the ball. Durant and Kevin Martin, both in the top 5 in the league in free-throw percentage, both went 1 for 2 at the foul line in the final 12 seconds to give the Rockets one last chance.
"We all stuck together," Westbrook said. "They made a run when we weren't able to make shots, but I thought everybody had a big role toward the end of the game and we came up with the win."
Harden ended up with 36 points and 11 rebounds, and Beverley had 16 points, 12 rebounds and six assists for Houston. The Rockets made up for a 40 percent shooting mark with a 57-40 advantage on the boards and a 50-30 scoring edge in the paint, engineering a massive turnaround after getting blown out 120-91 in Game 1.
And they did it without starting point guard Jeremy Lin, who didn't play in the second half because of a muscle contusion in his chest.
"Our team is a young team and we're not a perfect team by any stretch of the imagination, but they'll fight," coach Kevin McHale said. "They're a bunch of scrappers. They'll go out and fight you for it. So, I knew our team would play well today. That's who they are."
Beverley moved into the starting lineup as Houston went with a three-guard unit, and it didn't take long for the rookie to get under Westbrook's thin skin. Beverley lunged for a steal as Westbrook stopped to call a timeout after Houston took a 42-41 lead midway through the second quarter, with his hip slamming into Westbrook's right knee.
Westbrook smashed his right hand onto the scorer's table in anger and hobbled back to the huddle, but was able to stay in the game. He stripped Beverley for a runout layup two possessions later, but the Thunder still couldn't shake free.
Later in the half, Beverley knocked Westbrook down on a foul and then reached out to help him up. Westbrook slapped his hand away.
"It's part of basketball, playoff basketball. Everyone wants to go out there and win," Beverley said. "Anyone who knows me, knows my character, that I'm not going to back down from anyone, Russell Westbrook or anybody else."
Another rookie, Greg Smith, drew a technical foul when he jawed at Ibaka after dunking on the NBA's top shot-blocker and Houston was still within 57-55 at halftime.
Just after Harden's driving throwdown put Houston ahead 63-61, Oklahoma City raged back with a string of 13 straight points with Ibaka keying the run. He swatted Omer Asik's dunk attempt, hit two free throws and grabbed an offensive rebound that set up Westbrook's three-point play. The Thunder started the fourth quarter with an 11-2 to run to push their lead to 89-74 after Martin's 3-pointer with 9:22 to go.
McHale called time out, and the Rockets immediately responded with Beverley's 3-pointer off a set play – and that was only the beginning of the comeback.
"We were down 15, we could have just given up the game and said, `Let's go to Game 3,' but we fought back and took the lead," Harden said. "So, we definitely have some confidence going into Game 3 and going back home."
Notes: Beverley had not started any games during his rookie season, moving into the rotation midway through the season and playing 41 games. … After finishing second to Tyson Chandler last year's voting for NBA Defensive Player of the Year, Ibaka was third this year behind Marc Gasol and LeBron James. Ibaka has led the NBA in total blocks the past three seasons. "He led the league three years in blocks. I guess that don't mean nothing nowadays," frontcourt partner Kendrick Perkins said. "At the end of the day, I think he deserves it. He should have won the thing. But it's over with, so we're just going to move on."


text:
Questions?Give us a call
Tritech is the East Coast's leading life science lab equipment resource. We help university, pharmaceutical, biotech and government research labs purchase and maintain complex lab equipment each and every day. We sell and service only life science lab equipment and have for nearly 25 years. We specialize in Beckman, Sorvall, and Labnet centrifuges, but we pride ourselves in the fact that there isn't a piece of research lab equipment from any of these companies we don't know inside and out.
Beckman HPLCs and Liquid Scintillation Counters are not obsolete at Tritech! Contact Us for more information or call us at 1-800-886-7004.


text:
MGM Blu-Ray Wrap-Up 2 (US - BD RA)
Gabe checks out The Magnificent Seven, Blood Simple, and Dressed to Kill...
The Magnificent Seven
As an avid fan of the spaghetti/Euro Western tradition I have to recognize that Magnificent Seven had a massive, last minute influence on filmmakers like Sergio Leone and Sergio Corbucci. Director John Sturges (who also acted as producer, though according to legend not sole producer) not only beat Leone to the punch on adapting Akira Kurosawa properties as westerns, he beat him to the punch casting Eli Wallach as a (obviously darker) loveable villain, and Charles Bronson and James Coburn as antiheroes with a dark pasts. Coburn's character was also influential on Sergio Sollima, who's crafted a similar character for Thomas Milian for use in The Big Gundown and Run Man Run. Sturges' film isn't exactly a full-on revisionist western, as it lacks Corbucci's politics, but it is a stylized celebration of a then faltering art form, and like Leone's characters, the Magnificent Seven are basically underpowered superheroes. And like Leone's Fistful of Dollars, Magnificent Seven is the best kind of remake – it reconceptualizes Seven Samurai's basic plot and characters without wasting our time saying the exact same things, and stands alone when needed. I'm more familiar with Kurosawa's original, so I found comparing the two films quite fun this time around. Sturges' style is more traditional than the Italian filmmakers that followed. Stylistically speaking he had less of an impact than John Ford, but his use of the widescreen frame, and action direction are graceful without being showy. In my mind Magnificent Seven and The Great Escape are forever intertwined, and I'm pretty sure this is the first time I've put together the fact that both films were made by Sturges. The style, themes and actors really should've been enough to clue me in. Though clearly Seven Samurai, along with some similar samurai efforts, predate it, Magnificent Seven represents a sort of beginning for a series of ensemble 'tough guys on a mission' movies that proliferated throughout the '60s and '50s, like The Guns of Navarone, The Dirty Dozen, and The Wild Bunch, a list The Great Escape clearly belongs on.
Magnificent Seven hits Blu-ray with a magnific…erm, fantastic 1080p, 2.35:1 transfer. I never owned the film on standard DVD, so I can't directly compare, but can't imagine the difference being negligible. The film is plenty old, and was shot the old fashion way, so utter clarity is positively out of the question. There is plenty of grain, and a handful of inconsistent shots, but these are all part of the print, and should not be eradicated with unnecessary DNR or other such production toys (though there is some minor evidence of such fiddling in facial close-ups). The details here are sharp, ensuring the entire widescreen frame is clear, and only minor edge haloes slightly damage the experience. Despite the grain the majority of the print is super clean, occasionally faltering for some of the darker shots, and fluttering a bit between some frames. The colours are rich and solid in that slightly unnatural way seen in many similar period features. The DTS-HD Master Audio soundtrack matches expectations as well, and doesn't add on any awkward or unnecessary tweaks to get more breadth out of the 5.1 encoding. The majority of the sound is centered in nature, especially dialogue, and including off camera gunshots. The included two channel original Mono soundtrack has higher volume levels, but there is more distortion at high levels, and muddling of Elmer Bernstein's classic score. The extras include a commentary track featuring actors James Coburn and Eli Wallach, and producer Walter Mirisch, 'Guns for Hire': The Making of The Magnificent Seven' (47:00, SD), 'Elmer Bernstien and The Magnificent Seven' (14:50, SD), 'The Linen Book: Lost Images from The Magnificent Seven' (14:50, SD), two trailers, and a still gallery.
(No screencaps at this time)
Blood Simple
Blood Simple is an incredibly strong debut film, but it's far from Joel and Ethan Coen's best work, and despite critical praise, it didn't have a huge effect on anyone outside than the Coen's themselves and cinematographer-turned-director Barry Sonnenfeld. Stylistically speaking Raising Arizona and Miller's Crossing are the more obvious early calling cards. There are hints of future visions (gliding cameras, long bouts with stillness, faith in the audience's ability to follow a story with minimal dialogue, the brilliant, proto- No Country for Old Men climax), but there's a more certain sense of experimentation, specifically experimentation with other filmmaker's images (I see a whole lot of Ridley Scott and Michael Mann here). The writing is closer to where the team would end up, but the dialogue doesn't quite feature that Coen-specific poetry just yet. Characters interact in the usual Coen fashion, have the usual Coen eccentricities, and discuss incidental stuff for extended periods, but there's little to else to throw a first time audience off to who exactly made this film. Perhaps the most 'problematic' in comparing Blood Simple to the team's other efforts is the fact that its 1985 setting is inherit in every frame, which stands apart from the usual pack of vaguely timeless despite period setting films in the Brother's filmography. Now that I have that out of the way, I can add my voice to the long tradition of praising Blood Simple as one of the best of the '80s 'neo-noir' pack, standing proudly alongside Michael Mann's Manhunter, Brain DePalma's Dressed to Kill (see below), Dario Argento's Tenebre and Donald Cammell's under-seen White of the Eye. It's tense, suspenseful, occasionally funny, character driven, and incredibly well shot. The screenplay is perhaps more cryptic than is ideal at times, and like many of the Coen's films amounts to more of a series of discussions and set-pieces than a proper 'storyline', but the narrative is consistently intriguing, and supposing you haven't already seen the film, unpredictable.
This new Blu-ray release, it should be mentioned, is the 2000 directors' cut, which is a few minutes shorter, tightening up the whole endeavor (similar to Ridley Scott's Alien director's cut). I can't recall enough of the original cut to bemoan its absence, and suspect this choice was based on the digital revamping that went into that release. MGM/Fox probably wasn't looking to put any money into doing the same thing with the original cut . This 1080p, 1.85:1 transfer is, for the most part, quite good, featuring bright neon hues, deep, crisp blacks, and relatively impressive details (there are a whole lot of sweaty brows in this particular film). The print shows its age in terms of grain (the outdoor night scenes especially), and occasionally fuzzy edges, but there aren't many digital compression issues, save a few noisy blends. The soundtrack has not been revamped into 5.1, but an uncompressed DTS-HD Master Audio 2.0 track is plenty adequate. I suppose a discreet central channel would make for stronger vocal performances, but not enough to demand a refund or anything. The mix is pointedly stark, ensuring that only the most important noises define the aural experience. Some of these are loud enough to garner a bit more stereo involvement, especially the throb of Julian's office fan, but the lack of LFE enhancement doesn't really hurt. Carter Burwell's impossible to get out of your head score is plenty warm, and the additional music is both crisp and clear. Extras include an extremely technical commentary with Kenneth Loring, the artistic director of Forever Young film restoration, and a trailer.
Dressed to Kill
Of a rather sizable series of films, it seems that Dressed to Kill is the overall favourite among Brian De Palma's Hitchcock inspired thrillers. Despite liking the film for what it is, which is a cocky exploration of screen sex and violence, I find myself forever more drawn to the director's more unique thrillers, which is what I'd consider Sisters and Blow Out. Dressed to Kill is a studious film, one that explores visual themes and technical prowess without any particularly implicit meaning, which is a nice way of saying it's extremely well-made, but generally speaking, kind of dumb. The film is most brilliant when no one is speaking, which is a sort of unfortunate De Palma trademark. The scene in the art museum where Angie Dickinson sits and observes life in an art gallery looking for a piece of action is genuinely worthy of similarly wordless sequences in the best Hitchcock films De Palma is looking to ape (the sheer quantity of Hitchcock callbacks here could fill a textbook). The following post-coital scene pushes the silent storytelling even further, ending on a genuinely funny joke. The scene does almost nothing to develop the story, but expects quite a bit from its audience in a way so few movies do. Arguably the film loses most of its gusto once Dickinson is killed and the proper plot line takes hold, but these first 30 plus minutes, minus perhaps the more talkative scenes, makes up a wonderful short tragedy. The story outside the wordless scenes, and all mystery that surrounds it is weak, evoking memories of that other famous pretender to Hitchcock's throne, Dario Argento, who at his best makes up for his stilted scripts with dizzying, bloody details. De Palma generally does better with storytelling than he does with graphic, baroque violence. Not to say Dressed to Kill isn't among his goriest films, or that the kill scenes, especially the early elevator kill, aren't among the most evocative in screen history. The controversy that followed the film's initial release really does seem a bit quaint these days, but makes sense given its mainstream release. I agree with the critics that it's a trashy and lurid movie, but don't find it inordinately misogynistic for type (for real, frothing misogyny see Lucio Fulci's 1982 answer to De Palma's film, New York Ripper).
This new Blu-ray release's 1080p, 2.35:1 transfer is actually rather stunning, or at least more stunning than I was expecting, but isn't so different from the DVD release that fans absolutely need to run out and buy a new copy. For the first time ever, having been too young to see the film in theaters, I can see why the MPAA objected to the opening shower scene. De Palma really doesn't leave anything to the imagination. Most of the compositions are a bit on the fuzzy side, which is in keeping with my memory of every other release of the film, and I assume the intended look. I haven't researched the film enough to be certain, but assume De Palma was trying to evoke a dreamlike atmosphere ( Carrie does something similar). This look leads to some less than sharp details, and a constant sheen of film grain, but this disc's producers were wise enough to leave unnecessary DNR out of the equation. Contrast levels are perhaps a tad less aggressive than I'd prefer, which leaves some of the darkest sequences muddied, but overall colour quality is vibrant, and well separated despite the soft focus and grain. The DTS-HD Master Audio soundtrack doesn't move very far beyond the realms of the original stereo track, but sounds nice enough, and explores the dynamic range of the sound design, specifically during the largely wordless sequences, where Pino Donaggio music can exercise the appropriate shock. Dialogue is plenty clear, and volume levels are consistent, though I would prefer the previously mentioned music to be kicked up a notch. The surround channels get a bit of a workout during the thunderstorm, and feature some basic ambience on street scenes. The extras include the extensive and entertaining behind the scenes documentary entitled 'The Making of a Thriller' (42:30, SD), a comparison of the rated, unrated and television versions of the film (5:10, SD), 'Slashing Dressed to Kill' (3:50, SD), 'An Appreciation by Keith Gordon (6:00, SD), an animated photo gallery, and the film's original trailer.
* Note: The below images are taken from the Blu-ray release and resized for the page. Full-resolution captures are available by clicking individual images, but due to .jpg compression they are not necessarily representative of the quality of the transfer.
Review by Gabriel Powers
Seymour Cat Member Join Date: April 2006 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 109
Quote: Extras include an extremely technical commentary with Kenneth Loring, the artistic director of Forever Young film restoration, and a trailer.
I guess you didn't listen too closely. The commentary is a spoof, the Coen Bros hate commentaries.
From wikipedia:
Quote: Loring offers several entirely spurious "facts": for example, he claims that the scene with Ray and Abby driving in the rain, talking about Marty, was acted out in reverse as well as upside down, to synch the headlights of passing the car just as certain lines were said (he claims that filming the scene backwards and upside down was the logical choice to get the timing right, and that the actors are wearing hair spray to keep their hair pointing "down"). Elsewhere in the commentary, he claims that, in scenes with both dialogue and music, the actors simply mouth the words and record them in post-production, so they won't interfere with the music; that Marty's dog is animatronic; that the sweat on various actors is "movie sweat", gathered from the flanks of Palomino horses; that Fred Astaire and Rosemary Clooney were at one time intended for the film; and that a fly buzzing about is not real, but the product of computer generated imagery. "Loring" is voiced by actor Jim Piddock, using a script written by the Coen brothers
I guess you didn't listen too closely. The commentary is a spoof, the Coen Bros hate commentaries.
From wikipedia:
Quote: Loring offers several entirely spurious "facts": for example, he claims that the scene with Ray and Abby driving in the rain, talking about Marty, was acted out in reverse as well as upside down, to synch the headlights of passing the car just as certain lines were said (he claims that filming the scene backwards and upside down was the logical choice to get the timing right, and that the actors are wearing hair spray to keep their hair pointing "down"). Elsewhere in the commentary, he claims that, in scenes with both dialogue and music, the actors simply mouth the words and record them in post-production, so they won't interfere with the music; that Marty's dog is animatronic; that the sweat on various actors is "movie sweat", gathered from the flanks of Palomino horses; that Fred Astaire and Rosemary Clooney were at one time intended for the film; and that a fly buzzing about is not real, but the product of computer generated imagery. "Loring" is voiced by actor Jim Piddock, using a script written by the Coen brothers
Gabe Powers Editor Join Date: September 2004 Location: United States Posts: 4,721
That was me being sarcastic.
Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian
Disc Details
Release Date: 6th September 2011
Discs: 3
Disc Type: Blu-ray Disc
RCE: No
Video: 1080p
Aspect: Various
Anamorphic: No
Colour: Yes
Audio: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 English, 2.0 English
Subtitles: English SDH, French, Spanish
Extras: Guns for Hire, Elmer Bernstein and the Magnificent Seven, The Linen Book, Actor Commentary, Audio commentary with Kenneth Loring of Forever Young Institute, The Making of a Thriller, Version Comparison, Slashing of Dressed to Kill, An Appreciation by Keith Gordon, Image Gallery, Trailers
Easter Egg: No
Feature Details
Director: Joel and Ethan Coen, John Stuges, Brian De Palma
Cast: Yul Brynner, Eli Wallach, Steve McQueen, Charles Bronson, James Coburn, John Getz, Francis McDormand, Dan Hedaya
Genre: Action, Adventure, Crime, Thriller and Western
Length: 0 minutes
7Review Guide
Follow our updates
Hot Easter Eggs
Moon UK - BD Finding Nemo: Collector's Edition UK - DVD R2 Legally Blonde 2 UK - DVD R2 Evil Dead: Limited Edition US - DVD R1 Hellbound: Hellraiser II UK - DVD R2
Hot Interviews
Bruce Boxleitner Interview: Area 51 DVD | BD David Hayter US - DVD R1 | BD RA Van Duyl Gerben DVD Eddie Schmidt DVD David Prior: Part One DVD
New Easter Eggs
Star Wars: The Clone Wars - The Complete Season Two UK - BD Memento UK - BD RB Battlestar Galactica: The Plan UK - BD Moon UK - BD Star Wars: The Clone Wars - The Complete Season One UK - BD
Most Talked About
Halloween (2018) US - DVD R1 | BD RA Venom US - DVD R1 | BD RA Cloverfield Paradox, The US - DVD R1 | BD RA Suspiria (2018) US - DVD R1 | BD RA The Super US - DVD R1 | BD RA


text:
When I got my first tattoo, more than fifteen years ago, they hadn't yet become as ubiquitous as opinions (i.e., not everyone had one). Whenever I brought up wanting to get inked, I was invariably talked out of it.
"It can be dangerous," people said. "You'll have to live with it your whole life," said others. (And the Big Duh award goes to …)
"What if you want to go to a fancy event?" was another gem I heard all too often — as if the combination of formalwear and tattoos were too incongruous to even fathom. (That will come as a shock to Angelina Jolie.)
Still, I made up my mind to get one. I loved the way tattoos looked, and felt warmly toward the women I saw who had them. Not the tiny vine on the ankle, or the rose on the back of the neck, but the images, the words, the stories inked upon flesh, out there for the world to see. The women with those were daring, honest, open and tough — tattooed bitches, I thought, who would someday rule the world.
For my first piece, I chose a drawing of a scorpion that I saw on a book cover. Had I known how many people would use it as an icebreaker ("So, are you a Scorpio?"), I might have reconsidered, especially since I'm a Libra. But I liked the image — especially the idea of a delicate creature that can sting — and had it inked on my upper arm.
Butterflies followed, also in places that I could cover up if I wanted to. As much as I liked getting tattooed, I also wanted the option of being a blank slate (if I was meeting new people, interviewing for a job) when I predicted that those I encountered would look askance at my "body art."
My tattoos are a permanent part of me, just like my curly hair and my love of ugly cardigan sweaters. My personal style, however, was a little bit me and a little bit "Etch-a-Sketch," meaning something I could wipe clean whenever I needed to.
I could cover up the ink, straighten my hair with a blow-dryer (or, more drastically, with a chemical solution that smelled like a hard-boiled eggs rotting in hell) and put on a uniform: tight-fitting jeans, boots and a blazer for an audition. Black trousers and a button-down shirt for a job interview. Something feminine but reserved for a family gathering.
You'll notice that I subtly dropped the word "audition" in that last paragraph. Almost ten years ago, I saw a flyer on a Coney Island boardwalk advertising a casting call. I auditioned on a whim, and got the lead role in an independent movie. For the next few years, acting became a part of my life.
Truth be told, I didn't love it. I liked being part of the creative process, but hated most of the people I auditioned for. I resented being told to pluck my eyebrows or not to. Sitting pertly for two hours in an incredibly bitchy casting director's L.A. office was a pretty fucking horrible way to spend an afternoon. Having to grow out my hair when I really wanted to chop it off was demeaning.
I loathed the roles I auditioned for: A tough-talking babe in an apocalyptic future, going on about killer androids. A tough-talking babe who is also a cop, going on about the dangers of undercover work. A tough-talking babe who is homeless. A tough-talking babe who is an alien.
When I finally decided to put aside my acting "career," it was like the weight of a thousand tough-talking babes had been lifted off my shoulders. I became a mom, and went back to my first chosen vocation, writing. And I kept getting inked. My partner Joe's name is on one wrist, and last month I had my forearm tattooed — a Mother's Day present to myself.
I no longer worry about covering them up for any type of event, formal, family or anything. And I think as I get older, my tattoos get better and more meaningful.
Each one tells a story. My first tattoo will always be the scorpion I got when I was living on my own for the first time in San Francisco. I didn't bring any friends along, it was just me and the tattoo artist hunched over my arm, neither of us saying a word to each other. The butterfly I got on my foot in the dead of winter? The woman who did that one thought it was ill-advised.
"With your sock and shoe on it, it's never going to heal properly," she warned me.
I promptly came down with bronchitis and spent the next week and a half bedridden, my bare foot sticking out of the bedcovers, healing beautifully. My right forearm? The artist did it in one hour, without stopping, and then I met up with my partner and my kids and we went to the playground.
This is who I am. A wife, a mother, a writer and a tattooed bitch who will someday rule the world.


text:
WL-22460 – Adagio Silver Table or Bedside Lamp – Modern Cast Composite Lamp with Antique Silver Leaf Finish.
Off White, Linen Lampshade. Houses 1) 100 Watt Max Bulb with 3-Way Switch.
Height (top of finial): 27.5″
Lamp Dimensions: 6 Wide x 6 Deep
Lampshade: Top 15 – Bottom 16 – Side 11 – Off White, Linen
Bulb / Watt: 1) 100 Watt Max, Standard Medium Base, 3-Way Switch
Brand: Wildwood Lamps (Back to Category)
Type: Table or Bedside Lamp
Weight: 4 lbs.
Product SKU: WL-22460
Shipping Information: Typically Ships in 5-10 days via FedEx Ground from North Carolina.
Free Shipping to Lower 48 States: Satisfaction Guaranteed. Although rare, we replace any items damaged in shipping. Uttermost warranty applies. Returns accepted with 7 days of receiving. See Shipping & Returns Policy at bottom of page for more details.
Before You Purchase: 1) Check to make sure that the bottom width and depth of the shade is narrower than the table on which it sets. This is typically important on narrow surfaces such as buffet tables, dressers, or bedside tables. 2) Check the overall lamp height to make sure it is not too tall or too short.
Free Visualization Service: (click here) Send us a photo of the area where you plan to add a table or floor lamp – and we will insert any of our lamps onto your photo. This is an excellent way to get idea of what a mirror will look in your home – before you purchase.
About Wildwood Lamps: Offers an exceptional collection of affordable to high-end table lamps in porcelain, wood, crystal, ceramic, and other fine materials by top name designers.


text:
If you go
What: Silent speed dating, hosted by Be The Love You Are
When: 7-9 p.m. Tuesday, March 18
Where: Shine Restaurant & Gathering Place, 2027 13th St., Boulder
Who: Single people ages 24 to 45, give or take a few years
Cost: $25 for one ticket or $40 for a pair (bring a single friend of the opposite sex)
You've heard of a blind date.
This one is silent.
Zeona McIntyre knew the man across the room was boyfriend material without exchanging a single word. She met him at one of Boulder's silent speed-dating events.
At first glance, these singles gatherings are just what they sound like: single people sitting across the table from each other, gazing, smiling, motioning, making some sounds — but never talking.
But there's more going on than just that, event organizers say — both in the structure of the events and between daters.
McIntyre, of Boulder, says that, for her, it ran deeper than attraction at first sight. It was his body language.
"I remember seeing him dancing a little, swaying around, being in his body, being playful, and I was instantly attracted to that. I just knew from the beginning," she says.
Three months later, they're still dating.
And they talk now.
Chris DeCicco, of Boulder, the founder of Be The Love You Are, began organizing silent speed-dating events in Denver and Boulder about four months ago.
Similar dating events have begun cropping up around the world, too. There's Shhh Dating in London. Living Frequencies in Australia. And eyegazingparties.com can train you to organize your own eye-gazing party.
DeCicco is also a professional snuggler, known for organizing snuggle parties, which revolve around non-sexual cuddling and touching. He also has a background in Sacred Sexuality practices, and he thought silent speed dating would be a way to share some of those relationship exercises with the wider community in a less intimidating way.
"I'm working on concepts that tap more into the feminine side of people, using intuition and body knowing," DeCicco says.
Instead of focusing on your past stories, or even the checklist of what you want in the future, he says, he wanted to create a dating space where people could simply be present in the moment and practice awareness and consciousness.
That's where the nonverbal communication comes in, he says.
The National Institutes of Health estimates 60-65 percent of communication is nonverbal.
Most researchers agree that words are used to convey information, whereas the body is used to negotiate "interpersonal attitudes," according to "The Definitive Book of Body Language" by Barbara and Allan Pease.
In terms of romance, it's a lot easier to move from the heart than speak from the heart, says Kenda Seoane, who helps organize the events. She's working toward a master's in Somatic Counseling Psychology at Naropa University, with a specialty in body psychotherapy and dance/movement therapy.
She employs her background to help DeCicco bring their events beyond just eye-gazing. The first half of the events revolve around silly, nonverbal check-ins ("Everyone who's nervous come to the center of the room") and games (movement and improv activities).
Then, you sit across from one person at a time for a few minutes. Sometimes, it's "free form," where you do whatever you want (simple eye-gazing is perfectly acceptable). Other times, it's structured. Mirror the other partner. Do a crazy dance. Stand back-to-back and move.
The activities loosen people up and also help them connect. These are things you'd never normally do on a first date (act like an animal), and DeCicco says this opens the opportunity to express different parts of yourself in a short period of time.
No matter how silly it sounds — and it's designed to be — there's some guts to this strategy, too, organizers say.
"All of the weird and seemingly random activities that Chris and I introduce into workshops and events can all be backed up by the latest research where neuroscience meets psychology," she says.
Take the mirror exercise. Seoane says it stimulates "mirror neurons and resonance circuitry in the brain."
Boulder's McIntyre decided to attend a silent speed-dating event in November for the heck of it. She had recently gotten out of a relationship and thought the concept sounded interesting and different. Sure, maybe a little weird, she says. But definitely entertaining.
"Why not try something new?" she says. "If anything, the worst-case scenario is you have some funny stories to tell."
She didn't expect to actually meet a partner, or learn so much about nonverbal communication.
Perhaps just as surprisingly — at least to outsiders — McIntyre's story isn't rare. A good number of silent speed-dating participants have found love there.
Lauren McWilliams, of Boulder, is another success story. The self-proclaimed shy introvert says she appreciated the opportunity to make eye contact, play some games, be silly and not rely on small talk.
"I felt like I was able to just be more in my body, more aware of my breathing and myself," McWilliams says. "I like that I could sit across from people and make eye contact and see how the experience was different with each person."
She did not click with her partner during the nonverbal exercises. It wasn't until after the event that they began chatting and exchanged phone numbers.
But the silent introduction made the conversation later much easier, McWilliams explains.
Three months later, she and her partner are going strong, she says.
Seoane says she hopes silent speed dating opens new ways for participants to learn about themselves, as well as a chance to be real with other people.
There's nothing wrong with other forms of dating, she says.
"But we are saying that we want to bring lighthearted fun into dating," she says. "Seriously, when did it become painful work?"
Contact Camera Staff Writer Aimee Heckel at 303-473-1359, email@example.com or twitter.com/Aimeemay.


text:
Senator Joe Lieberman Follows Up His 'Report Blog As Terrorist' Letter By Asking Twitter To Block Pro-Taliban Feeds
from the seems-it-would-be-simpler-to-just-revoke-the-Senator's-internet-access dept
Having taken a swing at long-form blogging, Lieberman is now taking the fight to the other end of the "wordiness" spectrum: Twitter.
Senators want to stop feeds which boast of insurgent attacks on Nato forces in Afghanistan and the casualties they inflict. Aides for Joe Lieberman, chair of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, said the move was part of a wider attempt to eliminate violent Islamist extremist propaganda from the internet and social media. The Taliban movement has embraced the social network as part of its propaganda effort and regularly tweets about attacks or posts links to its statements.Like everyone else in this digital age, the Taliban is using various social media to communicate with its fans. But why should our Senators be concerned about what the Taliban had for lunch? And more importantly, why do they feel so deeply that forcing Twitter to block these feeds will prevent future "violent Islamist extremist" action? If NATO forces are attacked and no one tweets about it, does it change the outcome?
The feeds named in the Telegraph article (@ABalkhi and @alemarahweb) are about as "threatening" as a Westboro Bapist Church Twitter account, with a few facts tucked away between tweet after tweet filled with jingoistic statements and "preaching to the converted." The very idea that blocking feeds like this will deter or diminish future Taliban activity is laughable at best, and disingenuous grandstanding at worst. In fact, it makes Lieberman and his fellow Senators nothing more than "preaching to the converted" grandstanders, scoring easy points with voters who still somehow believe the only thing Twitter has to offer is lunch descriptions and terrorist propaganda.
As for Twitter, it won't even confirm whether or not Lieberman has asked it to block the feeds.
Rachel Bremer, a spokesman for Twitter, said: "This isn't something we'd comment on."Not only that, but Twitter won't have to block these feeds no matter how nicely Lieberman asks because the Taliban is not registered as a terrorist organization by the State Department. Any censorship applied by Twitter would pretty much just be a personal favor to Joe, rather than a government-sanctioned shutdown.
Lieberman obviously believes that his success with Youtube filtering should be applied to every area of the internet. He's already gone after the long (Blogger) and the short (Twitter) which means his next request for "Report as Terrorist" buttons will be sent to Tumblr, possibly resulting in the removal of f*ckyeahterrorism.tumblr.com and ryangoslingtaliban.tumblr.com.
One has to wonder why Lieberman is so persistent in his attempts to turn every form of social media into a scattershot weapon aimed at the angry words and hashtags of "Islamist extremists." Possibly a core chunk of his key demographic responds well to blaming the internet for terrorism, but that seems unlikely. Maybe he just likes to see his name in print and, much like four-year-olds and Lindsay Lohan, firmly believes any "attention" is "good attention."
[Press here to "Report Senator as Idiot."]