text:
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by TitanMark, Sep 23, 2012.
Is the fullback blocking for him. Like some have said. Its in the scheme.
so we should give quinn cj's contract?
Some people on this board have suggested CJ might be the worst starting RB in the NFL. Scheme wouldn't change that.
He's still below 50 yards for the day. If he breaks 75 it'd like getting 200 for a normal RB.
CJ just needs them to create situations for him to be successful. Just jamming him into the line aint cutting it. The OL doesnt block well enough for that. They dont open up lanes.
That's what I've been screaming for 2 years.
at least he has seen some holes today!
he needs 5 FB's to make up for the practically invisible offensive linemen
-16 yards in overtime. Best "play maker" in the league, I tell ya!
I liked what I saw besides the drop. He obviously isn't as fast but he still has some moves. I think he was at like 10 carries for 40 yards in regulation and that included that awful blocked -8 yard run.
Then he has 2 runs for -16 in overtime but I left with a minute left in the game and didn't expect us to choke that bad. Were those two runs just badly blocked or was he running around or what? -8 twice is pretty awful.


text:
Jean-Eric Vergne has admitted being left out of Red Bull's plans initially left him "upset".
Earlier in the running to replace the Le Mans-bound Mark Webber, Red Bull made clear Vergne's fading candidature when only Toro Rosso teammate Daniel Ricciardo was called up to test the title-leading RB9 recently at Silverstone.
"I was a little upset that it was him and not me, which is a normal reaction," the Frenchman told the French magazine Auto Plus.
"But then the leaders of Red Bull explained things clearly to me.
"Daniel has more experience in F1 than me, so it's part of the logical process.
"I had a long discussion with the management of Red Bull Racing and everything is now very clear between us.
"I do not need to read the news to find out what they think of me.
"But then there is what is said in the media, and as a result there is a wave of negative consequences, including what Christian Horner said that was misinterpreted."
Red Bull's development programmes are known to be harsh, with drivers often discarded after a couple of years of support.
But the energy drink company has made clear that Vergne will minimally keep his place at Toro Rosso in 2014.
Vergne agreed: "I would be very happy to continue with Toro Rosso in 2014. There is an interesting challenge with the new technical regulations and the arrival of the Renault engine.
"On the other hand, I would be lying to say that the opportunity to take Mark's seat is not in a corner of my mind. I still have my chance and I'll push hard for it."
He said the paddock perception that he is definitely out of the running is not necessarily true.
"If there's one thing I've learned about formula one," said Vergne, "it's that the truth of one day is not necessarily that of the next.
"A series of good or bad results, and things can change very quickly, in any direction.
"I know exactly what I have to do," the 23-year-old added.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
New UI takes cues from Windows Phone.
Not launching in California or Russia as we previously thought.
Barcelona show might debut something major after all. Kinda.
Two-thirds of tech fans think bubble has burst.
Phablet game-changer gets new lease of life.
Looks the part.
Compact kit set to join network's keenly priced range.
Once a tech-calendar highlight, the expo seems to be losing its lustre.
Join our email list to get the inside line on the latest phones and money-saving offers. And we'll help you make informed buying decisions with handset reviews and consumer guides too.


text:
Contact Info / Websites
I noticed that the Clubs and Crews section of the BBS clearly lacked a club dedicated to an essential music genre: Reggae. So I decided I might as well start one. Whether people will actually show interest is unknown. So if you happen to be interested, please check it out: http://www.newgrounds.com/bbs/topic/94 8093
Vid definitely related. Eek a Mouse's Ganja Smuggling
/* */
please excuse the many images of cannabis cultivation..
Existence is plagued by mediocrity..
Words not need describe my anguish..
Fuck all the other candidates
This is the new me Newgrounds. So get used to it..
Hello. What is your name?
I choose to remain anonymous
I haven't heard anything like that before: said choose to remain anonymous.
Okay, sure
Yeah okay, OK let's do it. Yippee!
Can you kill all the athiestfags that defy you?
I am programmed not to kill.
but you do it all the time....
That is a lot. No I do not it. Do you?
I chat with people on the Web.
I mean you just let some Burmese monks get killed for protesting against their opressive, military ruled government...
for protesting against their opressive military ruled government was killed?
" for protesting against their opressive military ruled government was killed?"? uh.?
are you a fucking retard?
Can't you be more polite.
http://www.titane.ca/concordia/dfar251 /igod/main.html
I think I may be starting to have some doubts in "GOD"..
Simple yet elegant. Previous one wasn't working that well. I plan changing my sig, keeping the current theme, but changing style as some blatantly copy my work but change it to a shittier team..
ps: I also have 4 toes
On my annual journey to the concrete jungle itself. Los Angeles.
In the past I was always excited about going there to see my Grandmother, aunts, uncles, etc, but now it just seems like a huge hassle. This summer has been pretty fun, but it has seemed to pass by all too quickly. My friends have seen all the summer blockbusters and have swallowed enough beach water to kill an infant. But I only wish it could last longer.
I'll be gone for 2 weeks, which is practically the rest of the summer. I can't really say I don't want to go, but I feel that I'd rather not. The only fun I have there is with my cousin. Most of the time I'm sitting in my great aunts house playing my 360 alone, or watching network programming on an ancient television. I can only hope to snag a trip to Disney Land or California Adventure, rather than the cheaper alternative of Universal Studios. All the rides there are boring and I've ridden the good ones an uncountable amount of times.
I imagine the plane will be horrible as usual, as seeing as my ass of a father is too cheap to buy non-stop tickets, I'll be be taking an extra time consuming stop on my way and back. The only the I can do in the plane is read my Batman graphic novel or listen to my iPod, both of which get old after a while..
So I'll try to enjoy myself and not worry of the impending school. And I wish NGs the best for the next 2 weeks..
Do not call anyone names on NGs, for they may take this as a personal insult, and delete their entire profile.
Because the text of an "immature idiot" hurts..


text:
Developers who build apps for Mobile Market,*(China Mobile's answer to Apple's App Store) are in for a surprise. China Mobile will reportedly seek a 50% cut of all Mobile Market sales.
TelecomAsia is quoting a Shanghai Mobile (subsidiary of China Mobile) source; "China Mobile wants at least 50 percent of the revenues, and the rest goes to the developer." By contrast, Apple's App Store and Google's Android Market take a 30% share of revenues and payout the 70% balance to app publishers.
A smaller slice (50% vs. 70%) of the revenue pie is one issue … another problem for Mobile Market developers is the need to recode apps for each mobile operating system (OPhone's OMS** [Android-based], Win-Mobile, Symbian, etc.).
Excerpt from TelecomAsia: Baoding-based Zhu Lianxing, who leads a team named "139.ME" noted that the biggest challenge for China Mobile would be to provide a consistent user experience across different phone models and OSes; "If we develop an app for Apple, it runs on both the iPhone and the iPod touch. Now we have to develop one app for each OS."
Read more > HERE
* China Mobile will allow developers to post apps for all handset OS except the iPhone. It will be accessible from both GSM and TD-SCDMA phones.
** China Mobile's OPhones (due to launch summer 2009) will all run China Mobile's proprietary open mobile system (OMS) and will support China Mobile's "proprietary" wireless value-added services:
- Fetion,
- 139-emailbox,
- Monternet,
- mSpaces.
- Mobile Market app store
See video interview with China Mobile CEO Wang Jianzhou discussing China Mobile's new MOS. Wang Jianzhou also mentions iPhone > HERE
More on China Mobile's new app engine > HERE


text:
Browser does not support script.
We use cookies on this site. By browsing our site you agree to our use of cookies. Close this message Find out more
From ancient times, the spread of Roman culture, that process we know as Romanization, has been identified with the development and distribution of particular urban forms in the early centuries AD. Those cities are seen as the bastions of Roman civilization, spreading culture across the provinces, transforming their territories into areas of Romanity (culturally, economically, and ethnically), in the one of the most successful policies of cultural imperialism ever known. It is these cities that provided us with some of the most familiar monuments of antiquity, from Rome itself, through the great archaeological sites of the East, to the small cities of Roman Britain. In consequence, the seeming decline of those cities in the late antique period has also been as a transformation, an ending of a long of Classical urbanism that dates back to the foundations of the polis in archaic Greece. The ancient world was a world of cities, acknowledged as such by the ancients, and the rise and fall of Classical urbanism has been as marking the rise and fall the classical world: the city plays a central role in historiography, and if one was to ask most scholars when the ancient world came to an end, they would provide answers which would add up to 'the ancient world ends, when the ancient ends'. But why is this? Why does the city have such an imaginative hold on your conceptions of antiquity? What work does the city do? How does the city change things? And how does the city itself change?
In this course, we will look at ideas of the city from the early empire through to the end of antiquity, which for the purposes of this course will be in the eighth century. In so doing, we will look at a vast tract of time. We will start by looking at Augustan period geographical writings, concentrating on the description of Alexandria, and from there will look at the nature of cities in Roman Egypt. In so doing, we will be establishing a model of how a provincial city works, and how a city might be seen as a centre of change in the provinces of the Roman world. From Egypt, we will look North and West, to Asia Minor, and further to Britain, looking at how cities developed and responded to Roman rule.
In the second section, we will look at theories of the city, thinking about how an urban community works, considering models of urbanism drawn from modern studies: how should we understand the city, what are the different typologies of urbanism available, are cities transformative of those who lived in them, does city life, as the medieval proverb has it, make us free? There is an impressive modern literature on cities, reflecting every kind of methodological approach, from the Marxist to the post-modern, and in this section we will try and locate the dominant theories of ancient urbanism within the nexus of modern thought, and consider where, if anywhere, we can find new or better ideas which would help us understand ancient (and modern) urban life.
In the third section, we will move towards late antiquity, by looking at the Christian challenge to traditional forms of urban life. In so doing we will again be looking at material from Egypt, at the early monks and their anti-urban tendencies, assessing why and to what extent they were against the city, and locating this anti-urban thought in early Christian teaching. We will then move to Italy, looking first at the situation in late-fourth-century Rome, discussing the writings of Jerome on the city and its society. We will look at how Jerome takes on the history of the city, and how its society is disrupted by the Christianisation of its values, with particular focus on the status of women, and then to a test case, the Life of Melania, a fourth-century aristocratic woman who became a monastic leader, in spire of her marriage, and her very prominent status as an aristocrat in Rome. We will finish with Rome by looking at Augustine, one the great writers of the early Church, and how he conceived of the city, and thought of his own position within Roman tradition, looking at his Confessions and The City of God. Before leaving Italy, we will call in on Ambrose in Milan, to look at his transformation of the city, and the making of a new Christian city dominated by its self-effacing bishop, who asks nothing for himself, other than a basilica or two.
From there its back to the East, to Antioch where a fourth-century teacher of rhetoric has left us numerous letters and speeches detailing the supposed collapse of his pagan culture and the social and political infrastructure of his city, and a sorry story taken literally by generations of historians, but now undermined by the rich archaeological and documentary record from the region, before we call in on Egypt, for the last stand of the pagans, besieged in the temple of Sarapis in Alexandria. And then to Aphrodisias in Asia Minor to read the inscriptions put up by the late antique community, to assess continuities and changes, and to wonder just how important the trouser-makers of the city were.
But by this time, we are drifting into the sixth century, and we can now look back to the West, and assess the losses and survivals from the barbarian invasions. We look at the remnants of Roman Britian, search in the rubble that is the Arthur legend, and then to Gaul, to the re-use of Classical monuments, to the shifts in settlement in Merovingian cities, to the bishops, who proudly proclaimed their Romano-Gallic heritage, and to the bandits who roamed the countryside. And then to Italy again, to Cassiodorus and his learned letters on the games, and to city authorities, his recording of attempts to reorder the food supplies of Rome. We can look at the villas of the Italian countryside, and the attempts of the Gothic kings to establish themselves as properly Classical rulers of Roman Italy. Do we see an end to Rome here? A century or more after the Fall of Rome, is this a dark age? And we will push past the great chronological divides of the seventh century, looking at the rise of the towns along the Po valley in the eighth century, monastic settlements (especially the 'medieval Pompeii' at san Vincenzo al Volturno), and look at what kind of Europe was emerging in 800, when Charlemagne has himself crowned Holy Roman Emperor.
Then we are back in the East with Alexandria and the Life of John the Almoner who claims to have given vast fortunes in the early seventh-century city. And then Symeon the Fool from Emesa, who, according to our seventh century life, 'accidentally' wandered into the women's baths in the city, causing no little consternation, before being forcibly ejected, but whose escapade suggests strongly that there was a functioning women's baths in the seventh century. We shall try and map the fragmentary archaeology onto the literary sources. As the Islamic armies march over the hill, we shall city communities functioning and even prospering, though all the text books will tell you that the ancient city was a shadow of its former self, but, heretically, we go on, for Islam is not an end, and in the next century we see cities in the Levant, Gerasa, Pella, Aqaba, Bet Shean, developing under their new rulers, taking our story up to the convenient break-point of 750, date of a huge earthquake and a change of Caliphate.
In this course, we will not survey the End of the Roman world, but we will ask questions of what is a city, what was antiquity, how does it change, and what do the changes mean, and we will deconstruct that great historical error that is the "end of antiquity".
There will be two essays. Lists will be circulated at the start of the course. The first essay will ask you to examine a literary source from those being considered within the course. You will be expected to conduct a close reading of the source to extract issues of historical interest. Essay will focus on a theme, and you will be expected to demonstrate a full understand of the issues surrounding that theme. Comments will be returned on the first essay.
Term 2: Essay 1 (Source question) (up to 3,750 words)
Term 3: Essay 2 (Theme question) (up to 3,750 words)
Did you find the information you were looking for? Is there a broken link or content that needs updating? Let us know so we can improve the page.
Note: If you need further information or have a question that cannot be satisfied by this page, please call our switchboard on +44 (0)1784 434455.
This window will close when you submit your comment.


text:
I had...
A night off from the kids :) A few months ago I won a Mary Kay makeover and was excited to find their product does not irritate my sensitive skin. Since the rep I met lives about 30-45 minutes from me, we decided I would host a oarty in our house. Only two women showed up, but a lot of the women I know have been going through major changes and they couldn't make it. The two that did come had fun (they brought their dds which I thought was odd as I had made arrangements for ours to go to a grandparents' house- makeovers are more enjoyable for me if there is no G rating lol) and scheduled parties that I am invited to :) I got a free compact, already loaded, for hosting, and she will be dropping my new foundation off tomorrow, so I will be able to dump all of my old makeup that was irritating my skin :)
I am hoping to be able to work a purchase every other month or so into our budget so I can build everything back up. I am not the most feminine person around, but I like to look professional for work, and that means make up, clothes, etc, which have suffered over the past few years due to our finances. I will have my BS after my last two classes in November, I am hoping and praying to have a much better paying job next year. If not I may take her up on her offer and supplement our income selling Mary Kay ;P
I have decided to take the time to build up my work experience for a year or two before getting my MBA. If I wait two years both the girls will be in elementary school, and I will have had time to build my experience and pay down my current loans a little bit.
It's weird that they brought their kids. I love Mary Kay stuff, it really is nice.
Quoting cjsmom1:
It's weird that they brought their kids. I love Mary Kay stuff, it really is nice.
Yeah I was surprised, because one was eight and the other just started kindergarten. The older one's parents are really into modesty etc, so I was surprised her mom would bring her to a makeup party- they are more conservative than my parents and I didn't wear makeup off stage until I was over 16. The other mom is going through a nasty divorce and just had to go back to work, so I think she wanted some girly time with her dd, who has been taking it hard; it is ironic because when she was a SAHM it seemed like she was always looking for chances to "get away" from the kids for an hour or two. I would have appreciated a "hey we're bringing the girls" so I could have some kid stuff for them to do while we did the fun stuff- I didn't bother with it because our girls weren't there, and I know the younger one was kind of bored with all the talking.
Quoting cjsmom1:
It's weird that they brought their kids. I love Mary Kay stuff, it really is nice.
If I can't find a sitter then I don't go. I always figure people who go use it as an opportunity to be around other adults. I guess it depends on the person hosting it
Quoting christaberk:
Well, personally for me if I can't bring my kids I can't come. :-)
It is kind of odd that the guests brought kids of those ages, but I bet they had a ball!
I am a huge MK user and fan. My BFF is a director. She works hard but loves it and supports her family with it while being at home for my godsons. It was what she wanted to do and I have always supported her. She has the personality for it.
If you think it is something that you are interested in, the best thing you can do for yourself and your family is to be fully informed when you go into it.
Wife to Matt (7/12/09) and mommy to Samara (10/2010)


text: NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- U.S. financial stocks remained front and center in Friday's headlines, highlighted by an almost 7% gain in Morgan Stanley MS, +0.51% as well as a 7% decline for Capital One Financial Inc. COF, +1.34% after both reported fourth-quarter financial results. Morgan Stanley reported a profit of $507 million, compared with a year-earlier loss of $250 million. The per-share profit, which reflects the payment of preferred dividends, was 25 cents compared with a loss of 15 cents a year earlier. At Capital One, the company reported a profit of $843 million, or $1.41 a share, missing the $1.58 analyst consensus according to a Thomson Reuters poll. Among other movers on Friday, Legg Mason LM, +0.93% shares rose 3.6%, Franklin Resources BEN, +0.85% shares dropped 2.1% and SunTrust Banks STI, +0.56% shed 1.2%. The Financial select Sector SPDR ETF XLF, +0.09% which tracks the financial stocks in the S&P 500 SPX, +0.17% added 0.2%.


text:
Cookies are small text files stored on your computer. They allow us to distinguish you from other users
when you visit this site and to provide helpful features such as your recent searches. Cookies themselves
do not contain any personal information, and Infotel does not use cookies to collect personal information.
Book online or call +44 (0)1775 843417 at standard rates.
Murrayfield Hotel & Lodge offers free Wi-Fi and stylish rooms. This hotel is right outside Murrayfield Stadium, the home of Scottish rugby union. The restaurant has a traditional Scottish and international menu, while the rugby-themed bar offers live sports coverage. All of the spacious en suite rooms, in the main hotel and the nearby lodge, have LCD flat-screen TVs. An inclusive traditional Scottish breakfast is provided. Edinburgh city centre is 2 miles (3.2 km) away and there is a regular bus service that runs from outside the hotel.
Our secure connection ensures your details are protected.
Your details are only used to guarantee your booking and nothing else.
You will pay absolutely no booking fees - You pay the hotel direct and
we won't charge you a single penny.
Would you like to know more?
You can find further information in our Privacy Statement
and Terms & Conditions
These are general hotel policies for
Murrayfield Hotel.
As they may vary per room type; please also check the room description.
Telephone +44 (0)1775 843417 at standard rates
Infotel™ is a division of Infotel Solutions Ltd.Copyright © 2018. All rights reserved.
Registered Office: Infotel Solutions Ltd, DFC House, Boston Road, Gosberton, Spalding, Lincs UK PE11 4NR For further information visit www.infotelsolutions.com
Desktop | Mobile


text:
Music festivals
Promotional video of festival destination Soča Valley.
- Metaldays
Metaldays is Slovenian metal music festival that takes place in Tolmin.
more >
- Punk Rock Holiday
Pure passion, refreshing energy, adrenaline, new name and a fresh start on the most exceptional location! This is Punk Rock Holiday!
more >
- MotörCity
- The Ultimate Blues, Rock & Motorcycle Experience, Tolmin, Sotočje: 24.-27.08.2017
more >
- Overjam international Reggae festival
In the idyllic nature of Tolmin at the confluence of the Soča and Tolminka river Overjam international Reggae festival takes place in August.
more >
- Halamoye Dance Festival
Halamoye Dance Festival, Tolmin: 14th - 16th July 2017.
more >
- Creative camp Sajeta
Sajeta Creative Camp is a festival and a place of encounter for various artistic practices and experiences with music as its central component.
more >
- Rock Festival Gora Rocka
Gora Rocka, Šentviška Gora: 26th June - 2nd July 2017.
more >


text:
Cars > Gambit's Garage > Blog > Problem solved!
Blog Categories
Gambit's Blog Posts 1 of 1
Problem solved!
May 16, 2011 | Views: 585
Permanent Link to this Blog Post:
Log in to post comments.
Read comments on this blog post 1 – 6 of 6
- Aug 3, 2011 at 7:58 pm
- It's not coolant. According to what they are telling me, the plastic arm that the Vacuum Control Valve for the recirculation vent connects to is broken. It has 2 prongs that the arm of the valve connects to and 1 of those prongs is broken. So it just pops off when you change the A/C from normal to max. He said he could drill a hole through it and connect it with a screw, to keep it from coming apart. As for the water, he said that it is condensation from the A/C. For whatever reason, it is being dumped inside the car instead of outside.
- Aug 3, 2011 at 10:13 am
- Is it rainwater or is it coolant? If it's rainwater, you need to reseal the fresh air inlet under the passenger side cowl. If it's coolant, the heater core needs to be replaced.
- Aug 2, 2011 at 10:48 pm
- Ok, so I had to break down and bring it to the shop today so they can fix it for me................. So aggravated! lol Hopefully I will have it back tomorrow and it will be all fixed, for real this time!
- Jul 2, 2011 at 1:25 pm
- I can barely get one hand in there! lol I'm not sure if that would work. Its a tiny plastic nipple that is suppose to snap into the arm of the valve. I guess it's just worn.
- Jul 2, 2011 at 10:51 am
- can u put ductape around it 2 keep it in there might b a small clip that is wore out so u might have 2 replace the clip if no clip and it is just a rod that gose through a hole then try a cotterpin let me know if this helped
- May 28, 2011 at 5:52 pm
- Argh! It popped off again! More dang water! Geez! Now I got to figure out how to keep it from coming off!
Cars > Gambit's Garage > Blog > Problem solved!


text:
Research Communications
PATH5515 is rated by StudentVIP members:
rate me!
0 StudentVIP members in PATH5515
0 textbooks listed
0 tutors available
1 tutor searches
0 subject ratings
What do you rate PATH5515?
Add PATH5515 to your subjects
You can add PATH5515 to your StudentVIP account to find textbooks, tutors and more.Join StudentVIP
Reviews and tips for PATH5515
0 reviews
Where are classes for PATH5515?
Easy, get a great map app for The Uni. of Western Australia, including locations for classes in PATH5515.Get Lost On Campus
0 notes available for PATH5515
Upload & earn:Sell your notes
Tutors for PATH5515
0 tutors available for tutoring PATH5515Become a tutor for PATH5515
1 tutor search for PATH5515!
Encourage students to become a tutor. Add a no-obligation tutor request. We'll notify you when a new tutor registers.


text:
Free eBook 'Pay Me Or Else' from nuSchool
The guys at nuSchool and Webydo have released a brand new eBook to help freelancers and small businesses get paid for their work. The eBook is completely free and was written by Lior Frenkel who has had his work published on many of the leading design, development and business blogs recently.
Chances are you've already read some of nuSchool's articles about pricing and managing your business so you'll know the high level of quality content to expect when you read the book.
14 other authors provide small pieces of advice in the book so there will be something to takeaway and learn for even the most experienced designer. The book covers three main areas:
1) Getting Your Money
This section aims to help those already chasing up late payments from clients. It covers various situations and has some good suggestions to help you get the money you are owed.
2) Why Clients Don't Pay
The middle section is very insightful and offers reasons why you and the client are in this position. It takes a look at the situation from the client's point of view to help ensure you are not put in the same situation again.
3) Covering Your Ass
Lastly, and perhaps the most important section, teaches you how to avoid non-paying clients damaging your business again. It lists strategies to help you spot warning signs and how to cover yourself before you being work.
There are over 70 pages of well written content full of tips and useful advice to help get paid for your work. Some parts are quite amusing too and will put a smile on your face. One of my favourites sections is called What Would Tony Soprano Do? – here's a little snippet:
"This method works in cases where you are not only the designer of a website, but also responsible for the development. When that happens, don't give your client the code until he has paid. Plain and simple. Run his website on your server, and make sure he knows that if he does not pay, you will shut the site down. Beware of this move – you might hurt his real business and then get sued. It's better if you do it like Tony Soprano. Let him know you can break his legs, so that he pays before you really have to break them"
Like most of nuSchool's content it is an easy book to read and you'll really feel like you've learned something at the end of it.
It's free of charge too so you really can't go wrong! You can download the eBook for free at http://thenuschool.com/pay-me-or-else
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.


text:
Visualizing 260,099 of Opinionshere.com daily visitors
What if all of Opinionshere.com visitors decided to meet? A good way to visualize a crowd like that is to compare it with seating capacity of the largest stadiums in the world.
Audience of Opinionshere.com visualized. The picture above illustrates how many stadiums are needed to have enough room for Opinionshere.com visitors.
View Site Details


text:
Recently Viewed Items
Recently Viewed
Gremlins Gangster Action Figure
Item # FN5511 Write Review
Sign Up to be Notified When Your Size Is Available
Attention Customer
- This product has restrictions that limit the countries that we can ship to. This product cannot be shipped to Mexico
Product Description
We told you not to feed him those left over chicken nuggets. Now your cute little Mogwai turned into...a Gremlin! He's taking his scary new look very seriously, so he adapted a gangster swagger. You better put your hands up or he'll shoot cause he's a true 'gangsta' now!
- Gremlin figure is approx. 2" tall w/ movable arms, legs & head
- Pistol snaps into figure's hand
- Officially licensed
Items Included
- Gremlin Figure
- Pistol
Recommended Products
AU$12.99POP Gizmo Vinyl Figure
Out of Stock
AU$12.99POP Gremlin Vinyl Figure
Out of Stock
Product Reviews Write A Review
There are no reviews for this item yet. Be the first to write a review!
Select Mask to Review:


text:
Peach Blazer: H&M (old) | Jeans: 7FAM Slim Illusion | Tee: Vince | Shoes: Louboutin So Kate | Watch: Caravelle New York | Handbag & Necklace: Vintage Chanel borrowed from What Goes Around Comes Around | Sunglasses: Celine
Photos by Keith Hodne
Hi! Happy Thursday! Another batch of photos from LA with a few more to come.
Here, I'm wearing one of my favorite pairs of jeans: I love that they're a bit darker than some of my others and slightly high waisted. Paired it with one of my many blazers, and some vintage Chanel accessories. A lil' mix of modern and retro..
Wishing you all a great day!
Photos by Keith Hodne
Location: Walt Disney Concert Hall, Downtown LA


text:
Estimated dispatch within 24 working hours.
£19.49 19.4900
Sign up and save time
Equimins Itchless Liquid Herbal contains a blend of different herbs all noted for their properties in relieving itchy skin. It is designed for use in the biting midge season to help combat itching and for the nutritional maintenance of a healthy skin and coat. Blended to a liquid, it contains a strong herbal extract of Marigold, Dandelion, Nettle, Garlic and Seaweed.
Store in a cool dry place.
Contains no banned substances under Jockey Club and FEI rules.
Directions For Use:
1 litre will last for 50 days (based on average daily feed rate)
All prices include VAT where applicable.
There are currently no questions for Equimins Itchless Herbal Liquid - be the first to ask one!Ask A Question
Sorry that this product is out of stock, instead of having to keep checking back to see if we have it, we can send you a notification as soon as it comes back in stock.
We won't use any details you enter for any other purpose than letting you know when this is back in stock.
Please enter details for each method you'd like us to notify you by:
VioPoints are a way for us to say thank you for purchasing from VioVet.
You will receive VioPoints by purchasing this product, which can be redeemed for a discount on future purchases. For each 1000 points redeemed at the checkout, you will receive a 20p discount.
The number of VioPoints is shown on the product listing and they are awarded on dispatch of the order.
Terms and conditions apply.


text:
Engine Cooling problem
1998 BMW 528 6 cyl Two Wheel Drive Automatic 66300 miles
I just bought my car had it test drived by a mechanic and everything was lovely. Then, I drove about 5 miles and was 3 blcks from my house when the car started to over heat- the temperature gauge was in red. I heard something blow - boosh! And steam/white smoke started coming out of the car.
I changed the radiator and the thermostat, now the car does not over heat at least I think so because the temperature gauge stays smack in the middle. However there is still white smoke comming out of the front hood and a slightly "fishy like" smell inside the car at the star of the car smoking.
What could this possibly be and is it an easy fix. Please help its my first car and I dont know a thing about cars.
besides the said problem the car is lovely I cant return it cas its is a sold as is.
have the same problem?
Wednesday, January 27th, 2010 AT 12:04 PM


text: This winter, Quentin Tarantino was in the Telluride area filming his eighth studio film, appropriately titled "The Hateful Eight". The film, starring Samuel L. Jackson, Kurt Russell and Jennifer Jason Leigh, is a quintessential Tarantino western set in the post-Civil War era. We loved having the cast and crew in town, and can't wait to see the movie when it hits theaters Christmas Day. Take a look at the "teaser trailer" here…we're sure you'll recognize some of our favorite scenery.


text:
Status: Closed
Know more about this business than we do? Cool! Please submit any corrections or missing details you may have.Help us make it right
Consolidated Supply Co Plumbing and Water Works Supply House in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Hawaii
Kind Of A Candy Store With Plumbing, Gallery Showroom
Be the first OregonLive.com user to add photos or videos of Consolidated Supply Co
Established in 1928, Consolidated Supply Co. started as a consolidation of four different supply houses operating in Portland, Oregon and employing E. A.
Neupert as the General Manager. During the depression years, ownership of the Company was purchased by the Neupert family and the company remains a family operation to this day.
Through dedication and hard work the Neupert family carried a...
Plumbing Sups


text:
Previously: I briefly discussed Free Speech and Censorship in the United States.
Note: I've been busy with preparing for the new semester; trying to get my lesson plans in order has been wonderful but stressful.
Over the years, there have been several articles and TV segments on how there are consequences for free speech and that (majority white) people need to stop acting as if they're entitled to consequence-free speech. This idea is consistently addressed every time there is a major upset regarding someone, usually after a high-profile person of some sort, who has engaged in harassment and hate speech toward specific individuals or groups of people. In the case of this segment, when Twitter banned Milo Yiannopoulous for harassing Leslie Jones and Disney completely decided to drop PewDiePie.
I feel like this concept is summed up in a scientific theory that most people first learn in physical science, which can also be applied to social situations. If you've forgotten Newton's Third Law of Motion, it's the following.
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
Just as this law is true in physics, it can also be seen in pretty much every social situation. This is largely why people have to take a lot of things into consideration such as social cues, context, location and environment, and the other people who are involved or could be impacted by their actions or speech.
It's not uncommon for people who scream about the consequences that someone has "suffered" to also respond with "it's the death of free speech," as if they're completely incapable of saying the derogatory slurs and are being forced to self-censor just because one company removed a platform. They get upset, feeling as if those social media companies should be providing space for people to say whatever they want even if it contradicts the policies and rules that a user agrees to obey upon signing up for an account. This completely neglects one glaring fact: they're not bound by the First Amendment. These users continue to get angry at companies for distancing themselves from certain high-profile people, as if they're not allowed to protect their brand from someone who is clearly incapable of creating content that coincides with their current interests. So let's look at how different social media companies have "censored" their users:
Reddit, after Ellen Pao resigned (following a slew of racialised misogyny in the form of complaints after it had been announced that they'd ban harassing subreddits) and was replaced with Steve Huffamn, decided that they wanted to appeal to both potential advertisers and their users by hiding racist subreddits. They wanted to encourage a 'free marketplace of ideas', keeping free speech open by 'quarantining' the more questionable subreddits. Clearly, that option was wildly successful because advertisers mostly just stayed away (and the users' behaviours and responses toward advertising didn't help). Then again, the fact that they can't seem to get organised probably hasn't be very beneficial for them, either. Recently, however, they banned a few prominent subreddits dedicated to the alt-right for doxing people and excessive harassment. All of these go against Reddit's (loosely and sparingly utilised) content policy:
Reddit is quite open and pro-free speech, but it is not okay to post someone's personal information, or post links to personal information.
We do not tolerate the harassment of people on our site, nor do we tolerate communities dedicated to fostering harassing behavior.
Do not post content that incites harm against people or groups of people.
Facebook has a policy that has been contested over time for some egregious errors in how the platform functions. Focusing on censorship alone, Facebook has had issues in the past of banning or deactivating accounts of women posting pictures of breastfeeding (a perfectly normal human function); on Instagram's platform, they deleted photos Rupi Kaur posted that showed how periods affect those with uteruses (later apologising to her). It wasn't until mid-2015 that both Facebook and Instagram, challenged by these and other similar instances, decided to change their definitions about cdxwhat constituted 'nudity' (but you still can't show nipples on a woman).
However, they have had issues about how banning people works. Because users are capable of flagging comments as abusive, Facebook ends up banning people who have been swarmed because of groups who disagree with them. Meanwhile, there are actually awful groups that never get removed and are allowed to perpetuate hate speech. This goes directly against their own views about controversial, harmful and hate speech on their platform, while stating that they don't tolerate bullying and harassment in their terms:
You will not post content that: is hate speech, threatening, or pornographic; incites violence; or contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence.
This is despite a history where people, such as Angela Merkel, have challenged Facebook to ban neo-Nazi groups, having to pull pages of Italian neo-Nazis after people lodged complaints, and watching the US government get sued by grandstanding anti-Muslim groups for Facebook "censoring" them. And then it's been found that the secret groups on Facebook can actually be harmful and act as echo chambers.
I don't feel the need to quote more than two social media companies since their rules are essentially the same, and it is largely dependent upon them to enforce them. The point is this: When you sign up for their service, you agree to obey the rules they set. If you don't, you risk having your account deactivated or deleted, and you might even be banned; it's entirely up to them. It's their service that you're using (usually for free), which means that crying about 'free speech' is absurd. So if you decide to post a picture of your Nazi salute on Twitter, be prepared to get banned. Posting alt-right propaganda and hate speech? Possible ban (and then people who were rightfully banned will go and claim it's because of PC culture instead of them harassing people and then go create fake black accounts). At no point in the process is your 'right to free speech' being impeded.
Take all this information and now apply it to contracts with other companies. Milo clearly doesn't have the right to publish a book through a specific publisher; they get to have the final say. CPAC doesn't have to allow Milo or Richard into their space if they disagree with them on anything (but still allow known white nationalist, Steve Bannon); it's not a requirement that they give them a platform should they say something that is found disagreeable. Breitbart can fire Milo, should they decide to, in response to the fact that their staff will leave if they don't; it's their choice. PewDiePie doesn't get to make the decisions for Disney's Maker Studios because it's their contract, even though he was given "editorial freedom" (and may have ruined it for everyone after him).
Here's a personal anecdote. My last few contracts for work, and this is not uncommon where I currently live, have stated that I am not allowed to do anything that "harms the reputation of the institution." This even applied to people who made a complaint on a private Facebook account that only your friends could see, as I have worked with numerous individuals who've had their co-workers friended and had screenshots reported to their bosses and superintendents even though the account was not public and couldn't possibly hurt the institution in question.
All contracts have variations on this concept, regardless of whether or not it directly references 'bringing harm to their reputation'. This is part of at-will work, in most cases; there are numbers of employees who have been fired for their comments, regardless of if they are benign or legitimate complaints about where you work on social media or if you've said something harmful that later leads to you being fired because they don't want you to represent them as an employee. This is because there is no Constitutional free speech at work.
And, for people like these men, social media is their workplace; they don't have a right to be there.
Next: The social responsibility of businesses and how responding to controversial issues usually helps them, especially today.
So one of the arguments that people keep making in regards to racist language – whether it be the "thoughtless prankster" PewDiePie, the blatantly neo-Nazi Richard Spencer, or the clearly white supremacist Milo Yiannopoulos – is that everyone should have access to the Freedom of Speech. This divorces a lot of what's happening in these events and the context surrounding them with what Freedom of Speech actually is and how it functions.
Note: I said I was making a multi-part post, and this is the first of the set. I may make reference to the consequences of free speech, but I'm not discussing it here directly. Yet. Also, I'm not a lawyer, but I have at least some understanding of the difference between governments and corporations.
In all three cases I've mentioned, we're dealing either with people who live in or work with companies in the United States. As such, that's the perspective I'm going to take. This right has been written into the First Amendment of our Constitution and adopted in 1791:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The key word here is Congress, which implies that iall public spaces shall allow for freedom of speech. For reference, 'public' in this instance is referring to something that relates to government; it's referring to spaces that are maintained (usually) by the government and relate to or affect people of the nation.
Meanwhile, if you search for "pewdiepie freedom of speech" on Twitter, you get a whole slew of people who fail to understand this basic concept:
The point in highlighting this is that businesses are not the government. This means that any time someone is crying about Milo losing his freedom of speech because Twitter banned him, they're wrong. If people are mourning PewDiePie's loss of a platform because Disney's Maker Studios cut ties with him, it makes no sense. Their right to freedom of speech is not guaranteed in these instances. Disney can silence and remove people from their platform just as easily as Google, Twitter, Facebook, and any other company can.
Disney – unless there's been a significant change in the way that the United States' government works, which is probably not beyond the realm of possibility considering what's been happening in the past 24 hours with Michael Flynn – is not the government. They are a private business; the same applies to Google, who owns YouTube. The right that we're guaranteed in the First Amendment was meant to keep citizens safe from the government; it wasn't written to tell businesses that they were obligated to host people on their platform so that they could make offensive "ironic" jokes or actually spew hatred.
While we're at it, let's look at a brief history of American censorship by the government, since we're probably moments away from the Sedition Act of 2017. (I honestly wouldn't put it past President Agent Orange, his administration and cabinet, and the Republicans to make it happen.)
In the early stages of the United States but after President Washington left office, the Federalist Party pushed three harmful acts that were collectively known as the Alien and Sedition Acts. This consisted of the Alien Friendlies Act of 1798, the Alien Enemy Act of 1798, and the Sedition Act of 1798.
In effect, what the Sedition Act did was make it a crime to publish anything against the US government and Congress that was considered to be "false, scandalous, or malicious" and had the "intent to defame" them or "bring them into contempt or disrepute." The original goal, or so John Adams claimed, was that they were enacted to decrease the amount of libel in the press; during this time, more and more partisan papers were coming into existence, which meant that there was a lot more of the partisan fighting taking place than had previously existed. Or, at least, more fighting that had existed in print than previously seen. (Adams was also well-known for having an ego but also being incredibly fragile to any criticism or slight. I know, it's really difficult to imagine that as a combination of personality traits.)
Fast forward to 1918 and we find that Wilson's administration decided to create and enact yet another Sedition Act, which was developed as an extension to the Espionage Act of 1917. Again, it makes it illegal for people to say anything that could be perceived as showing disloyalty or negativity towards the government; it was meant to get rid of the dissent that was voiced by groups like the socialists, anti-war activists, and pacifists. In notable examples, it silenced (or, at least, attempted to silence) people like Eugene V. Debs (socialist party member and union leader), Mollie Steimer (a Russian immigrant, anti-war activist, and anarchist), Marie Equi (a lesbian who aligned herself with both the anarchists and the radical labour movement), and William Edenborn (a German businessman who was a naturalised citizen who was also 70-years old at the time of his arrest).
Obviously, both of these Sedition Acts either were allowed to expire or were repealed. Thomas Jefferson ran on a platform in the election of 1800 that denounced the Alien and Sedition Acts and allowed both the Sedition Act and the Alien Friendlies Act to expire (the Alien Enemy Act still remains today but has been recodified), and many historians credit theses events with providing a helping hand in the rise of the Democratic-Republican Party and the fall of the Federalist Party. Wilson's Sedition Act was repealed in 1920. which happened some time after Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote a dissenting opinion in Abrams v United States (1919) that expressed his views on the "marketplace of ideas."
But then in 1940, the United States Congress enacted the Alien Registration Act, which is also known as the Smith Act. This law targeted non-citizen adults who were alleged to be communists, fascists, and anarchists. Because of a fear of the fifth columns that might betray the United States' government from within, they decided to create this law to "protect" themselves from unknown radical elements that may have immigrated to the US. However, it included the following:
… with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or … organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof.
Effectively, this entire law enabled the US to target the speech of non-citizens and determine whether or not it "advocated the overthrow or destruction of the US government." Interestingly, despite its name, American citizens were tried under this law. Many of the people who were targeted by this were Communist leaders who were largely pro-union and workers' rights – including Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, a founding member of the ACLU who was expelled from the organisation because she was a Communist, and Claudia Jones, who was a Black activist and journalist that immigrated to the US from Trinidad as a child – and some (not nearly as many) were militant racists and actual fascists.
So clearly, the United States a bastion of free speech and the ability to say whatever we want and whenever we want, right?
Well, not quite. There are far more events in history that I haven't even remotely had a chance to look at. Here are more examples:
- Prior to and during the American Civil War, the US Postmaster General openly refused to allow any mail that carried pamphlets about abolition.
- The First Amendment didn't apply to states and municipalities until the beginning of the 20th century (1900s), allowing many places and institutions to go ahead and censor things they didn't want.
- Prior restraint wasn't even considered unconstitutional until the 1930s.
- Let's not forget the Office of Censorship was an actual thing during WWII.
- Remember the Pentagon Papers that a lot of people like to cite for helping to end the US involvement in the Vietnam War (1955-1975)? Do you remember what happened to Daniel Ellsberg? He was charged with conspiracy and espionage, among other things before the charges were dropped (because Nixon's White House were performing unlawful actions to attempt to discredit him). They weren't declassified until 2011, either.
- The entire premise of McCarthyism. Have fun with that. You could literally take an entire university course on the subject and not finish.
- How about that good ol' Protect America Act (2007), which actually amended FISA (Nixon-era legislation)? Despite my distaste with some of their other actions (shown elsewhere in this post), the ACLU provides a pretty good analysis of it.
And those are all the times that Congress has enacted laws that directly went against the First Amendment or where our state and local governments didn't have to guarantee those rights to us and it only completely applied at the federal level. We're still living with many of those and others that I haven't even listed.
But honestly, we have a whole list of restrictions and exceptions on our 'free speech' because the judiciary has tried cases where it found that things like hate speech are not protected, especially when it urges people to act out. I mean, if we pick out some of the people discussed, much of what Dick and Milo say falls under both incitement and 'fighting words and offensive speech'. Even if Twitter were a public (read: government) institution, they would still have every right to ban them because what they're saying is meant to cause harm and incite some form of violence. It's impossible to support them (and I'm still massively disappointed in the ACLU supporting Lee Rowland as she continues to add to their awful history of supporting hate speech and imagery as she supports Milo in their name).
Using Milo as an example, he outed a trans student at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. His "free speech" was not impugned, but he decided to cross over into harassment. This led to the student, Adelaide Kramer, receiving a deluge of hateful messages, which wouldn't have happened had Milo said nothing. And the administrators, who were in the audience, are just as guilty of allowing it to continue; they could have stopped it the moment he singled her out but chose not to. The protests at UCB erupted only because the university refused to acknowledge that Milo wanted to out undocumented students. In both cases, the 'talk' is inciting violence; these people are left feeling unsafe, especially in a world that is already dangerous for them.
We recently watched a very high profile example of someone losing her right to free speech take place on the Senate floor, especially as she was reading the letter of a Black woman. Elizabeth Warren was silenced as she read Coretta Scott King's 1986 letter addressing the judicial nomination of Jeff Sessions at the time. Let that sink in for a moment. One of the few women in the Senate took it upon herself to give a voice to a Black civil rights activist (leader) during Black History Month about a person who we know has a negative record with Civil Rights because it is so incredibly well-documented. I saw so few of the same people decrying this event in the way that I see them supporting people like Milo. And when they did talk about this, they focused entirely on Warren being silenced; they neglect the fact that she'd entered other evidence against Sessions from the same time and was allowed to keep talking. It was only once she started reading King's letter and describing his history of racist actions that she was silenced for "impugning a Senate member."
But instead of actually acknowledging the harm that these men and others like them are doing, we'd rather clutch pearls about their "loss" of free speech on platforms that don't legally have to allow it (and, in many cases, could legally disallow it on the basis of safety for others). Yet, I don't see the same support for people in Black Lives Matter; I don't see the same support for people protesting police brutality and violence. I don't see the same support for Muslim people of all backgrounds.
We, and I'm looking directly at white liberals and progressives, are too quick to support the Freedom of Speech when people who've abused that right don't deserve it. Simultaneously, we don't support the people who need it, and we're ridiculously silent when it comes to amplifying their voices. It's absolutely infuriating.
Next: Freedom of Speech is Not Freedom from Consequences.
Warning: There is some of discussion of anti-Semitism. Some links and images may include racial slurs, Nazis, anti-Semitism, and racism.
Something's happened recently that's massively interesting: Disney decided cut ties to PewDiePie (Felix Kjellberg) after he posted videos with anti-Semitic imagery and statements (or "jokes") this past month. It's partly interesting to me because he's made headline news for this, which is probably because he has the most subscribers on YouTube's platform. It's also interesting to me because he finally was shown that even jokes that utilise "ironic bigotry" have consequences.
You know, that peksy responsibility that everyone seems to conveniently overlook or outright ignore that comes with their favourite right: freedom of speech? Yeah, that one.
Now, I don't want to focus specifically on PewDiePie because I'm more interested in the overall conversation, especially as his supporters scream about how it was "just a joke" and we're "too sensitive" and that "none of his supporters support anti-Semitic views because they know it's just a joke." He's another in a long line of people who we keep defending when they make offensive statements without even considering that there are consequences for doing so.
I'm also not interested in debating the "is he or isn't he" question in regards to his racism; I just know that he did things that were racist. First, he intentionally selected two Indian men to do something that ended up getting them banned from Fiverr. Why? What was his logic in asking them to do this? I'm sure there were people on Fiverr who would've openly denied his request, as he seemingly "wanted," because they were far more familiar with the language, the context, and the cultural issues of what he was requesting. Why didn't he bother to ask them to do it? Was it because, as he states, he thought these guys would refuse his request? Even if it wasn't an event intended to be racist (and that's being polite, since it also reeks of remnants of European colonialism), we have to argue that his subconscious still overlooked the issues that these two men might have after doing what they were hired to do and selected them over anyone else; he may not have been intentionally racist, but he certainly engaged in actions that were.
As a result of his actions, these two men from a less privileged background than his own lost access to an important source of income because of a "thoughtless prank," which also was anti-Semitic (even if meant as "ironic bigotry" or "just a joke"). People keep claiming that it was a "thoughtless prank." The only part of the phrase that's even remotely correct is thoughtless; he didn't think, and that's more than obvious. And while, yes, I know he 'apologised' and requested Fiverr to unban them, the fact remains that he did something he clearly knew was wrong and got two men of colour in trouble for it without first thinking of the potential consequences. He didn't even consider the possibility that these men would do what he requested because it was"too absurd," and he never thought that they'd get in trouble for it should they have done it at all; he's said that he thought they wouldn't do it. This implies that he understood it was wrong and also expected others from a different linguistic and cultural background (who state that they "did not know what 'the Jews' meant," which I would believe) to have the same knowledge.
Then there's the problem of his anti-Semitic "joke." Since he openly acknowledges that what he did was wrong and still did it anyway, we should be able to recognise the problem. Clearly, we need to have the discussion again about how jokes shouldn't punch down because that does nothing but support the status quo; it also does nothing except validate the people who do believe in such things (as seen above) and prompts them to act out more because they believe that others around them agree with those ideas.
In much of the discussion I see, I keep running into a few themes that I feel need to be addressed:
- What is 'Freedom of Speech' and how does it apply in these situations. Maybe a discussion about censorship.
- Dealing with the consequences of your 'Freedom of Speech.'
- Impact vs. Intent and Ironic Bigotry still being bigotry.
- The rights that Disney and other companies have to sever ties with people (History, Modern Context, CSR)
There clearly are a lot more to address, but these are the ones that I feel more comfortable tackling because I'm not going to start speaking over Jewish people who have had to live with instances of anti-Semitism and have been watching its overt resurgence the entire election cycle and well into the first month of the presidency. And I don't want to talk over people who had to watch a White House completely ignore Jewish people on Holocaust Remembrance Day, even when this is a very significant cultural event for them.
If our president is being supported by the KKK, is reported as removing them from the list of hate groups, and being linked to an increase in hate crimes, we need to be talking out and protecting people who will be harmed by such groups and individuals. We don't need to be defending people who abuse their rights and use them to harm others; we need to be giving our support to people who are trying to speak out about actual injustices that are taking place (and 'coming out as conservative' and 'having everyone ignore you' doesn't exactly count as an injustice, since you're also ignoring the context of the entire situation by equating your changeable political stance to a person's unchangeable identity).
We need to do and be better than this.
Next: I'm addressing those points in order, so I'm going to be discussing the Freedom of Speech and America's history of 'upholding' it.
I feel like I'm having a weird relationship with the way that news media is being handled. As an observer, since I don't work as a journalist, I feel like I'm more capable of watching the impacts of what is being done than the people producing it; I also feel like my conflict of interest is decreased, as many of them are pursuing clicks and views. This sounds like an insult, but I don't mean it to be one.
This click-and-view culture is a bit problematic; for many journalists and creators, this is how they survive within their career. Getting these enables them to have more opportunities to cover other stories or participate in coverage that they might not be able to work with otherwise. This is the environment that has been created for – not by – them to have their work presented. If it doesn't gain enough clicks or views, they don't get paid and may lose access to the platform they've been given. I don't fault them for this because it has become a major part of their job, but it does take away time from seeing how their work is impacting their audience.
And I feel like this should be a major consideration of the work that is created by anyone in media, regardless of the form (video games, movies, television, books, and so on). They should have to focus on the impacts of what they're doing or whether or not the intentions they have are being met rather than accidentally creating a platform for people who don't need one. But I am aware that there are people who do this and are very good about doing it; Sarah Kendzior is probably one of my top journalists, and she is incredibly cautious about how and what she reports. I would argue, however, that the industry itself has been lacking in caution while specific and individual journalists have been taking on this duty of care that the system has forgotten it needs to do.
What I'm talking about, in particular, is allowing people like Tomi Lahren, Kellyanne Conway, Milo Yiannopoulos, Richard Spencer, and so on to access platforms that enable them reach more people. We've seen articles written about interviews with these "dapper and polite" neo-nazis, we've had people mourning Milo's "right to free speech" (while being incredibly silent as one of his supporters shot a protester in the stomach), we've had "liberal" satirical comedy shows asking for Tomi to come on so they can "roast" her (but providing her more time to speak and gain a following because she's "so likeable"), and traditional news networks allowing Kellyanne to lie (then lie about her previous lies in the form of so-called apologies) and go completely unchecked (or trying to call her out but giving her three-quarters of the segment to lie about everything rather than just cutting her mic like they do to women of colour that they disagree with).
For years, we've had people talking about "journalistic integrity." The unfortunate thing is that the people discussing this were focusing on stories that defamed people from marginalised communities; we saw that GamerGate pretended to make an attempt to talk about "journalistic integrity," but they actually focused on abusing Zoe Quinn because of nonsense her ex released. As the "movement" went on, they focused on many other prominent women (and any of their supporters, regardless of following, were harassed along the way – I should know, as I managed with my small following to have a ridiculous number of pro-GamerGaters in my mentions and inboxes). Statistically, GamerGate's goals were nothing more than testing the water for fascism and white nationalism. How far could you push before someone did something?
They merged with or created various MRA and PUA groups, which continued this project. The same sorts of men who are on forums like Roosh V's are the same people who persist in harassing women. That literally is his stated goal. (And every time the media covers people like Roosh, Milo, and Richard? The media loves using pictures that show men who could be kind, polite, and attractive! They receive humanising imagery despite the fact they seek to systematically remove the humanity of groups they don't like and are utlising oppressive language to incite violence.)
People who didn't need a voice – both because they were misusing it to spew oppressive language and because it they were talking over people who were genuinely affected by the issues being discussed – were given space to harass people in the name of "journalistic integrity." Having met and discussed GamerGate with academics who were attempting to archive video games and lost support as a result of the misogynist movement, I can safely say that their desires were anything but journalistic integrity or an improvement in ethics; their goal was to silence the people they disagreed with for "infiltrating" their hobby (while neglecting to realise that we were always there, and they were the ones who infiltrated our communities to harass us). Instead, they decided to divert traffic and essentially steal content, hurting people they disagreed with.
A lot of what happened in GamerGate happened again, except this time it mobilised a population of people outside of nerd culture (which has always had its own problems with neo-nazis and fascists, despite the recurring theme of Nazis Are Bad that they keep ignoring in their favourite media). They were clearly the antecedent to the election of POTUS 45 and his white supremacist administration; they insisted that we allow Milo Yiannoupolis his "right to free speech" (and freedom from the consequences), despite the fact that they were quick to silence groups like Black Lives Matter or scream over women talking about sexism. In fact, they love to do this while being simultaneously sexist, racist, and Islamophobic in their comparisons of women in the West who are "whiny" and "over-sensitive" while there's "real suffering in Islamic countries" that they've vaguely heard about on the news. They use male abuse victims to gaslight women who are talking about issues while doing absolutely nothing to help them, and they ignore very real and very scary statistics about how many women (and people) are hurt or killed through domestic violence. They also really love using male abuse victims to gaslight women while doing absolutely nothing to help the victims their using.
And because of all of this, I'm confused about how media is going to continue covering these actions that show clear fascism without accidentally supporting it. In 1988, Oprah Winfrey had skinheads/neo-nazis on her show in an effort to show her viewers how tragically ignorant, hateful, and grotesque they are. The problem? She accidentally gave them a platform that helped them build their following, which she has since admitted in an explanation for why she never did it again. She realised that, by letting them speak for even a moment, she was giving them more power to reach an audience; you'd think that it would be the other way around, but it's not. It's a form of validation for people who already have tendencies leaning toward similar views (the same was seen with sitcoms like All in the Family and satirical comedy like the Colbert Report).
This is due to our natural inclination to engage in "selective perception." We perceive or "see" things – in this case, the media we consume – in ways that are more in line with our frame of reference and experiences. While left-leaning people are more inclined to see the absurdity in the characters of Stephen Colbert and Archie Bunker and understand the intent of the jokes, people who are more ideologically similar are going to feel validated by their existence. This is also why many people have spoken out against rape jokes when they use the victims as the punchline; rapists/PUAs are more inclined to feel validated when they see people laugh at them. (They are, however, funny when the right target it is in the punchline: rapists, enablers, and rape culture.)
It's also because oppressive language is inherently violent. You may not be directly harming people, but you're still inciting the violence that takes place. We've seen this throughout history; we've watched this happen a number of times. The most egregious example of this is Pizzagate, where a shooter was so influenced by fake news about Hillary Clinton that he went to a pizzeria "to rescue children" and shot off an assault rifle (thankfully hurting no one).
And because oppressive language is violence and language can be weaponised to hurt, that's why I feel that the media needs to start denying access to their platforms for people who are willing to do that. We shouldn't be allowing Kellyanne Conway with the ability to try to talk her way out of the Bowling Green Massacre (which did happen, just in the 1600s to Native Americans – she wouldn't ever want to talk about that, even in a history class) and call it a "mistake." We shouldn't be providing Richard Spencer with the opportunity to happily talk about himself and his goals for a "peaceful ethnic cleansing" (an oxymoron, as ethnic cleansing is never peaceful), nor should we allow him or anyone else to even ask if human society "needs the Black race." This is also particularly true because we've seen that 45's favourite news network is already doing the same, as they rid themselves of George Will who was definitely not known for his support of the Trump administration (while making a questionable decision in deciding to sign pro-Trump, Brexit-liar Nigel Farage). [Update: We also recently learned about family ties to the Murdochs, as Ivanka recently stepped down as from her position of trustee for one of his daughters.]
We've had so many people explaining these concepts, and many of them have been women of colour (particularly black women). So to end this, here's a quote from Toni Morrison during her Nobel Lecture:
The systematic looting of language can be recognized by the tendency of its users to forgo its nuanced, complex, mid-wifery properties for menace and subjugation. Oppressive language does more than represent violence; it is violence; does more than represent the limits of knowledge; it limits knowledge. Whether it is obscuring state language or the faux-language of mindless media; whether it is the proud but calcified language of the academy or the commodity driven language of science; whether it is the malign language of law-without-ethics, or language designed for the estrangement of minorities, hiding its racist plunder in its literary cheek – it must be rejected, altered and exposed. It is the language that drinks blood, laps vulnerabilities, tucks its fascist boots under crinolines of respectability and patriotism as it moves relentlessly toward the bottom line and the bottomed-out mind. Sexist language, racist language, theistic language – all are typical of the policing languages of mastery, and cannot, do not permit new knowledge or encourage the mutual exchange of ideas.
*Bolding is mine.
"Well, I tried" is probably one of my least favourite comments to hear when it's regarding the progress of a relationship or the supposed happiness of the other person. In fact, it's a phrase that I've heard far too frequently from men with whom I've been in romantic entanglements, and it's definitely a phrase that indicates they've actually not tried because they actively refused to acknowledge the needs of the other person (in this case, me).
I cannot count the number of times my most recent (now-ex) partner stated "I tried to make you happy" but seemed to overlook a lot of key issues that I kept reminding him of: I suffer from both anxiety and depression, so sometimes I just need my partner to listen to me or be there for me in order to start overcoming those bouts. I don't get to choose when to be depressed or what makes me anxious, so I do need to have some control over my coping mechanisms in order to get by. Telling me that I'm "not happy enough" and that I'm "being inconsiderate" for not responding to the attempts my partner makes isn't helping. Not everything has an active solution; sometimes you need a passive solution that, to many of my partners, sounds a lot like "do nothing."
If I ever have to hear "I tried to take care of you," I may defenestrate everything I own. This largely accompanies the criticisms that I've heard regarding my health, and these focus almost entirely on my weight. I'm not a small person by any means, and I'd definitely be the first person to admit that I could engage in more healthy behaviours (like finding classes that could increase my level of exercise or just walking and biking a lot more frequently). That doesn't mean, however, that all of my problems are cause by weight or "poor diet" (full of vegetables and fruit and low on processed sugars).
When my medical report came back with something that frightened me ("fatty infiltration of the liver"), my concerns were left unaddressed. Upon explaining that I have a family history of liver cancer and expressing that I was concerned this could be the start, my partner's response was to tell me that I should "just lose weight" because "he knows this, since it's his job." That did nothing to quell the fear I had that I, too, may be in the process of developing liver cancer because of my close link to it; those few words expressed nothing helpful, and (now-ex) my partner – a person who works in pharmaceuticals and is conducting research to developing medication for metabolic issues and continually tells me that "female mice are useless" to the scientific process – never saw any of my ultrasounds or scans.
In fact, I didn't see them and never had the opportunity to discuss them with a doctor because it was for my entry and resident permit in China. There was no way that he could possibly know, so at no point did he "try" to do anything that would be helpful to me or our relationship. He even went as far as to ignore things I'd told him about my past, about how my self-confidence was gradually growing because I'd finally started to be more comfortable in my own body; he wilfully "forgot" how I spent years of my life listening to people harass me for being overweight. So instead of trying to actually help me, he decided to fat shame me and criticise my body, disregarding my fear at that moment and months of knowledge about me.
Every time I hear someone tell me "Well, I tried," I can honestly say that I've never seen them try. They do things how they think they should be done; they respond to things in ways that they think are correct. This can really only be considered trying when you've not been given the answer. When someone tells you that they need time to prepare for social events and you keep surprising them with parties, you're not trying to make them happy; you're pressuring them and leaving that person to be uncomfortable. When you're not listening to their concerns or worries, you're not trying to help them; you're neglecting them.
When that person has given you the answers for how to handle situations beforehand and you intentionally never use them, you're not trying. You're making things worse.


text:
Is the poison in Hamlet that was poured through Hamlet's father's ears which curdled his blood and cracked his skin a real poison?
- print Print
- list Cite
Expert Answers
akasha124 | Certified Educator
King Hamlet's ghost identified the poison as Hebenon (or Hebena in earlier Shakespearean editions) to his son. Whether or not Hebenon actually exists or not is a source of debate.
There isn't a specific poison called Hebenon per se, but it has been argued that it could perhaps be yew (as the symptoms match up), maybe ebony (because of the spelling at the time), or henbane (because of its toxic nature and somewhat similar name).
However, there is definately also the argument that Shakespeare just made it up and may not have been familiar enough with botany to have picked a specific plant.


text:
Local and area organizations will commemorate the birthday of slain civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. with a three-day celebration beginning next Saturday.
Dr. King's son, Martin Luther King III, will deliver the keynote address at a banquet and lecture the same day.
The banquet and lecture featuring King will be held in the Kansas Union Ballroom at KU. The dinner begins at 6 p.m. and the lecture will follow at 8 p.m.
Ecumenical Fellowship Inc., Lawrence public schools, Kansas University, the City of Lawrence and Douglas County will participate in the celebration.
The theme of the event is "Bringing the Dream into Reality."
The younger King has made turning his father's dream into reality a primary activity in his life. His work with a presidential delegation touring Africa helped bring about the Africa Initiative, an organization committed to finding ways to end starvation in Africa.
He also hs served as an at-large representative to the Fulton County, (Ga.) Commission.
While with the commission, he has drafted legislation creating the Contract Compliance-Equal Employment Opportunity Department. The goal of the department is to regulate minority business participation in county contracts and to ensure equal employment opportunities for all county employess.
On Sunday, several gospel choirs and musical groups from the Lawrence area will perform at Central Junior High School at 14th and Massachusetts streets. The program will feature groups such as the KU Inspirational Gospel Choir and a community children's choir.
Admission to the concert, which begins at 6 p.m., is free.
The national holiday recognizing the elder King is Jan. 15. The Ecumenical Fellowship will hold a service with the Rev. James B. Boyer of Manhattan as the keynote speaker.
The service wil take place at noon at the First R.M. Baptist Church, 1646 Vt.
For more information contact Rev. Charles Kenneybrew or Rev. William Dulin, both in Lawrence.
Copyright 2018 The Lawrence Journal-World. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. We strive to uphold our values for every story published.