text:
Over the years, I've tested dozens of gluten-free baking mixes, and though many have evolved to showcase innovative ingredients and fancy formulations, it's impossible to deny that sometimes the old tried and true options work best. 1-2-3 Gluten Free baking mixes aren't revolutionary, but I'll be darned if they aren't tasty.
1-2-3 Gluten Free Baking Mixes use what I call the "standard gluten-free flour blend" of rice flour, potato starch, tapioca starch, and xanthan gum. Of course they use their own ratios, and have many, many variations – from fortified to sugar-free, chocolate-infused to perfectly spiced. But from my perspective, 1-2-3 Gluten Free follows the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" motto with delicious success.
Tasting Notes for 1-2-3 Gluten Free Baking Mixes
We sampled just a small handful of their products (at last count they had around 18 mixes!), including the following.
Divinely Decadent Brownies
It's important to clarify the brownies we sampled as they actually have two varieties: Devilishly Decadent (with chocolate chunks) and Divinely Decadent (without chocolate chunks and thus free of soy lecithin). We trialed the "Divinely" variety, but trust me, those chocolate chunks were not missed. These crusty, fudgy brownies were just like my favorite homemade brownie recipe!
Because we're at slightly higher altitude (about 4400 feet) they rose quite a bit, cut a thick crust on top and then collapsed beneath. I was worried that they were ruined, but once I cracked through the top, dense, rich brownies were revealed. Both Tony and I devoured them for 2 days straight! We decided to froze the leftovers and yes, they do freeze very well.
Sugar 'n Spice Pan Bars (Pumpkin Recipe)
I was craving something a little holiday-inspired, so I cracked open a can of pumpkin puree and made the dairy-free version of the pumpkin Pan Bars on the box. The batter was AMAZING! I had to quickly wash the mixing bowl and beaters before I personally scraped it clean.
I took a peek a little over halfway through and was shocked at the site: a sky high cake! Call it our altitude, but I think their mix is a little more cake-like than dense bars. That said, they were de-li-cious! And this is from someone who really doesn't love cake. They were just perfectly sweet, with the right amount of spice and warm hints of pumpkin. They'd be delicious with tea or milk alternative, iced, or topped with some dairy-free ice cream. Tony agreed, polishing off almost the entire batch before I had the chance to freeze any.
Allie's Awesome Buckwheat Pancakes (Pumpkin Recipe)
I hate to sound like a promotion, but seriously, this was another winner. Since I had leftover pumpkin puree from the pan bars, I went with the pumpkin Pancakes variation on the box. I was worried, as the batter was a little floury in taste, but the cakes ended up perfectly light and puffy. In fact, I forgot that they were even buckwheat-infused! Tony gave them an enthusiastic "they're good!" – he always uses the word good, so I have to judge by the inflections in his voice and the cleanliness of his plate – not a crumb remained.
Tony had the pancakes with maple, but I went with raw almond butter and enjoyed them with tea. They were just sweet enough and oh-so-comforting.
Important Note: For all of the above we used the dairy-free basic instructions on the box, which used eggs. 1-2-3 Gluten Free provides tested egg-free / vegan instructions on either the box, their website, or both for all of their mixes. But, we haven't personally tested those egg-free recipes. They also provide numerous additional recipes on their boxes (inside and out!) and website for enjoying these mixes every which way.
The Facts on 1-2-3 Gluten Free Baking Mixes
Certifications: 1-2-3 Gluten Free Baking Mixes are Certified Gluten-Free and Certified Kosher Parve. They are also labeled as GMO-Free, though I didn't note certifications.
Dietary Notes: By ingredients, 1-2-3 Gluten Free Baking Mixes are dairy-free / non-dairy, egg-free, gluten-free, nut-free, peanut-free, soy-free, vegan / plant-based, and vegetarian. Nonetheless, verify on the label and check with the company on their manufacturing processes for all varieties if potential allergen cross-contamination is an issue for you. Processes, ingredients, and labeling are subject to change at any time for any company / product.
For More Product Information: Visit the 1-2-3 Gluten Free website at www.123glutenfree.com.


text:
One of the best times of my weekend is the Sunday morning car wash I have every week to make sure my car is always looking tip top. I'm going to be using the Stripper Suds Car Wash Soap with a Snow Foamer. What detailing activities will you be getting into this weekend and what products will you be using?
Please share!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Do you need one-on-one attention and focus on your specific goals? Personal training sessions with me will guarantee this and help you reach your goals faster.
With a focus on both your fitness and nutrition, you will see visible changes both inside and out!
Contact me for your free consultations, info on my rates and any enquiries you have.


text:
According to Mr. Latham, "New business risks continue to emerge and regulatory issues are growing more complicated globally. That is why we're committed to build out our global programs and captive expertise with top industry talent like Steven, whose extensive experience will ensure our clients and brokers get the best possible captive-related solutions that address their risks now and in the future."
In his new role with XL Catlin, Mr. Bauman will oversee the growth and development of XL Catlin's global insurance programs and captive business in North America. He will provide technical support across business lines in structuring global captive programs; ensure global programs are in compliance and following best practices; and work with XL Catlin clients and broking partners to develop new and innovative captive products.
Mr. Bauman will also report to Bob Peretti, Head of Client and Broker Management in North America. Commenting on the appointment, Mr. Peretti said: "Steven has more than 25 years of experience serving clients and their captives and broad expertise of captive solutions in risk management. With Steven's extensive market knowledge, and XL Catlin's broad risk appetite and service excellence, we will accelerate delivering our best in class global program solutions to North American based multinational companies."
Mr. Bauman joins XL Catlin from Zurich Insurance Group where he most recently served as head of captive services. Prior to his recent tenure at Zurich North America, Mr. Bauman worked for Aon and before that at XL Catlin managing its New York underwriting hub. He is a graduate of Colgate University and holds a Master's from Stevens Institute of Technology.
XL Catlin offers global programs and captive fronting across a wide range of lines, including, general liability, workers compensation, property, business interruption, environmental, marine cargo and professional liability. XL Catlin and its Network Partners can provide insurance coverage in more than 215 countries.
About XL Catlin's Insurance Operations
XL Catlin insurance companies offer property, casualty, professional, financial lines and specialty insurance products globally. Businesses that are moving the world forward choose XL Catlin as their partner. To learn more, visit xlcatlin.com.
About XL Catlin
XL Catlin is the global brand used by XL Group Ltd (NYSE:XL) insurance and reinsurance companies which provide property, casualty, professional and specialty products to industrial, commercial and professional firms, insurance companies and other enterprises throughout the world. Clients look to XL Catlin for answers to their most complex risks and to help move their world forward. To learn more, visit xlcatlin.com.


text:
ISO 17712 Freight containers – Mechanical seals
General information ISO 17712 pdf
Number of Pages: 31
Edition: 1 (Monolingual)
Status: Published
Stage: 60.60 (2010-09-03)
ISO 17712 establishes uniform procedures for the classification, acceptance and withdrawal of acceptance of mechanical freight container seals. It provides a single source of information on mechanical seals which are acceptable for securing freight containers in international commerce.
The purpose of mechanical seals is, as part of a security system, to determine whether a freight container has been tampered with, i.e. whether there has been unauthorized entry into the container through its doors. Seals can be effective only if seal users properly select, store, account for, apply, document and attend to seals prior to use and in use; whilst these issues are not addressed in ISO 17712:2010, they are relevant to successful use of the seals covered by ISO 17712:2010.
Seals that conform to ISO 17712:2010 are suitable for other applications, such as bulk railcars or truck trailers used in cross-border and domestic operations. Users and regulatory agencies can apply ISO 17712:2010 to other applications as they deem appropriate.
Revision information
Revises: ISO/PAS 17712:2006
File Type : PDF File ISO 17712


text:
Our hearts break for the children we see in orphanages; so sweet, but scared, ever fighting, insecure, and attention seeking. There is a reason you want to take every single one of them in your arms and hug them. Their whole beings are screaming out for someone to love them.
There is nothing like God's love. Yet He uses family to illustrate love throughout the entire bible. He set up the system of family. Family is the Father's invention; it is what He wanted for each of His children. Because love is everything.
That is why we believe in Eternal Family Project. Because it is a family, because it is love the way God planned it. We don't believe in only feeding and lodging; we believe in girls thriving in a mother's love, we believe in the security of a family, we believe in hope for the future through education, and we believe in the healing power of the Father that goes beyond anything we as humans can come up with.
It works. We see the girls transform into beautiful, peaceful, confident girls. It is a visible transformation. It does not happen overnight. For some girls it is a longer process than for others, but within a couple of months of arriving we can see the serenity of God descending over our new sister. It is not anything we are doing. It is the Father's love being applied in real life.


text:
When all you want is to be a loving Mom, a house that doesn't look like a hurricane has been through it, and being the boss of your biz... but all that juggling has left you EXHAUSTED, DEPLETED, and just feeling like a complete FAILURE.
Sound familiar? Being a Mama is an amazing experience – but it's also a CRAZY one. And I know just how depleted you feel right now... which is why I created REVITALIZE! An e-course program for Moms who want to do so much, but just can't seem to have the energy to do everything.
Through the Revitalize e-course program, we will:
- Work through some habits/beliefs that have become so much a part of your motherhood, but are actually detrimental to your focus and energy
- Work to create new truths and corresponding hard-hitting action plans and routines to implement into your lives and passions NOW
- Claim back your energy and focus, so you can channel them into the things and people that matter most to you
- Make real progress in claiming success for your passions
Are you ready to take the first step to bringing back more energy into your life?
Gain instant access to the the following products:
- A 50-minute e-course that will instantly re-focus and re-energize you, guide you through your current limiting beliefs, and help you create solid action plans to move forward
- 3 worksheets that will help you get incredibly clear on what truly are your guiding values and your corresponding priority areas in life
- And then from there, 3 worksheets that will help you realistically assess the support you need in each of your priority areas - and then plan on how to actually get the support into your life!
- A handy prioritization tool to use daily - to help maximize your focus, energy, and time
- And lastly, two BONUS tools to help you ramp up your self-care in the following areas: sleep, nutrition, and exercise
For a limited time ONLY, the REVITALIZE: A Mama's Guide to Bringing Energy Back Into Life will cost a total of $37. That is an incredible deal, given the instant access to all the products listed above! Your time is now, Mama!
Once you press that button and pay for the course, you'll immediately receive a link to the 50-minute e-course, the three worksheets that will help you get clear on your foundation, the three worksheets that will help you map out your support system, the prioritization tool, and your two BONUS tools for self-care!
Interested to find out what other Moms have said about the product? Read on!
Ready to begin your own journey to revitalizing your Self, your Soul, and your Life? Let's do this!


text:
Revolutionary Roast Beast w Red Wine & Cocoa
10 days until Christmas, and you haven't reserved your beef tenderloin, or turkey, or prime rib. OMG. While you're formulating your New Year's resolution to be more like the holiday host(ess) in Real Simple, or some other glossy mag, let me tell you why you are the best. Ever.
Everyone eats the same thing for the holidays. Not the exact same thing, but in general, the holiday meal focal point in America is usually either loin meat from a beef animal (prime rib, tenderloin), turkey, or ham. To the ham eaters, I applaud you. Cured hams are not only delicious and awesome, but they are thrifty as all get out. Turkeys...well, it kind of took part of an entire book to share my thoughts on the poultry industry (yikes). And, meat from the back of the beef animal (loin), is rather scarce in proportion to the rest of the animal, which is part of why our meat industry is so big and so awful. We keep asking for cuts from this relatively small part of the carcass, and not properly valuing the rest. When we do this, we are part of a problem of waste and disrespect, and yes, mechanized suffering, just to get more, more, more of the thing we are used to. Never fear. We are mighty, hopeful, agents of change. What better time of year to look at our roast beast in a new light?
So, back to you being awesome: if you forgot to order your loin roasts, you are perhaps one of the most brilliant revolutionaries in the kitchen today. Bravo, for this presents an opportunity for alternatives.
You see, back meat (loin) makes up about 25% of the total animal, but 100% of the animal is oh-so valuable. You may not think of the holidays as a time for activism, but consider that trying a roast from the beef shoulder, sirloin, or round can not only break the cycle of demand for rare muscle commodity, but it can save you money, and taste damn good to boot.
Whole animal utilization is not a fad. It is not resigned to posh restaurants, or people with tattoos. It is an important concept that drives our need to make better use of every valuable scrap, out of respect for the beast, and out of respect for healthy food economy. If we continue to seek only ribs and loins, and grind the rest of the animal for low-value fare, we are not creating systems for health and wealth. You can create an equally impressive meaty main this holiday season, from other parts of the cow. Here are some cuts to ask for:
- Beef Chuck Eye Roast
- Beef under blade roast or boneless short rib
- Beef Coulotte, Picana, or Top Sirloin Cap Roast
- Beef Top Round Roast, Cap on
Your butcher will know how to fabricate these cuts for you, and can modify the muscle groups included based on how many people you need to serve. And, for being so awesome, you can use the recipe below to prepare your roast beast.
Happy Holidays! Wishing you deliciousness, community, and revolution.
Roast Beast w Red Wine & Cocoa
Per 5lb. of beef sirloin, round, or chuck roast:
1 T. kosher salt
1 T. cane sugar
1-2 T. minced garlic
1 - 1.5 cups bold red wine
4 T. butter, melted
unsweetened, high quality cocoa powder
optional: vegetables to accompany the roast. I used fennel, leek, and red onion.
If your roast came tied, you can leave it as such. If it is not tied, do this first part before tying:
Combine sugar, salt, and garlic in a small bowl, then rub all over the meat. Dump the red wine into a zip-top bag or non-reactive container, then place the rubbed roast into the bag. Turn it to coat it well with the wine, then place in the refrigerator for 1-3 hours at least. Longer is OK. Chop your veggies to the desired size.
When you're ready to start cooking, Melt the butter in a deep cast iron pan or dutch oven, and preheat the oven to 300F. Spread the cocoa powder out on a plate and set aside. Remove the roast from the wine (but reserve the wine), and allow it to rest a moment on a clean plate or cutting board, then tie it up with butcher's twine every two inches or so.
When the butter is melted, dump it or brush it (whatever suits you) over the roast. Now, dust the roast or roll it in the cocoa powder, ensuring it is coated on all sides. Place it into the cast iron pan or dutch oven, and surround it with the vegetables (if you're using them). Place, uncovered, into the oven and roast until the internal temperature is 120-125F. If you like it more well-done than the top photo, take it to 130-135F. Note: these cuts will be much better cooked medium-rare or medium.
Allow the roast to rest after cooking, before slicing and serving.
What to do with that wine marinade you reserved? Make a reduction, to serve with the beef or with whatever you want. When I tested this recipe, I removed the fennel, leek, and red onion once they were roasted (this was well before the meat was finished cooking), and put them in a separate bowl with some blanched snow peas and watermelon radish, and then poured the reduction over that for a beautiful salad. Oh, and grated some manchego over top.
To produce the reduction, just dump the reserved marinade into a small pan. Bring it to a boil, and then reduce the heat slightly to keep it simmering. Allow it to reduce and thicken quite drastically. Taste it. If it is too salty, add a bit of water or more wine, and reduce again. Simple as that. If you don't want to dress a salad with it, smear it on a platter under your cocoa roast beast, or turn it into a gravy.


text:
[ v40 p792 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
40 FLRA No. 64
Before Chairman McKee and Members Talkin and Armendariz.
I. Statement of the Case
This unfair labor practice case is before the Authority on exceptions to the attached Administrative Law Judge's decision. The Judge found that the Respondent violated section 7116(a)(1), (5) and (8) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) by refusing to provide data to the Union which it needed to determine whether to file a grievance.
The Respondent and the General Counsel filed exceptions to the Judge's decision. The General Counsel filed a motion to strike the Respondent's exceptions, and filed an opposition to the Respondent's exceptions. The Respondent filed an opposition to the General Counsel's exceptions and a motion to dismiss the complaint. The General Counsel then moved to strike the Respondent's opposition and the Respondent's motion to dismiss the complaint. The Charging Party also filed an opposition to the Respondent's exceptions.
Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations and section 7118 of the Statute, we have reviewed the rulings of the Judge made at the hearing. We affirm the rulings as discussed below in Section VI. B. Upon consideration of the Judge's decision and the entire record, we adopt the Judge's findings, conclusions and recommended order to the extent consistent with this decision.
II. Preliminary Matter
The General Counsel moved to strike the Respondent's exceptions as being untimely filed and untimely served on the parties. In a separately filed opposition to the Respondent's exceptions, the Charging Party similarly argued that the exceptions were untimely.
Under the Authority's Rules and Regulations, exceptions must be postmarked by the due date or, if hand delivered, filed in the Authority's Docket Room by that date. 5 C.F.R. §§ 2429.21(b) and 2429.24(a). The due date for exceptions to the Judge's decision in this case was December 26, 1989.
The Respondent's exceptions were discovered in an in-box in the Authority's Washington, D.C. Docket Room on the morning of December 27, 1989. They originated in the Respondent's Washington, D.C. office. No envelope, postmark or evidence of mailing was attached to the copy found in the Authority's Docket Room, and there was no date stamp or other indication of how or when the exceptions arrived.
In view of the fact that the Respondent's exceptions were first discovered in the Docket Room in-box after the December 26, 1989, due date with no evidence of the date or time of delivery, and there is no indication that the exceptions were received or postmarked by the date they were due, they are untimely and have not been considered.(1)
III. Background
This case involves a request for information under section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute. The General Counsel asserts that the information is necessary for the Union to determine whether to pursue a grievance on behalf of a unit employee. The potential grievance relates to the employee's Officer Corps rating.
Robert J. Marren is a border patrol agent at the Fabens Station, part of the Respondent's El Paso, Texas Sector Office. Since February 1987, he has been executive vice-president of the Union. On December 1, 1987, he received his Officer Corps ratings from his first-line and second-line supervisors, as was customary. Both supervisors gave him the highest overall rating possible. However, he received a rating of "good" rather than "very good" from both supervisors in several elements, including the productivity element. Marren believed that he had been treated differently than other agents because of his union activity.(2)
The rating factors for the productivity element are as follows:
1. Quantity and quality of work compare favorably with that of others who have similar production opportunity.
2. Finished product is technically satisfactory.
3. Diligently pursues tasks to completion without unnecessary delay.
On December 7, 1987, Marren wrote to the Respondent in his capacity as Union representative, stating that he was contemplating filing a grievance and that the Union was investigating the possibility that he had received disparate treatment. He requested the following three categories of unsanitized data relating to all journeymen unit employees of the Fabens Station from November 1986 through November 1987:
1. officer corps ratings;
2. all documents contained in the performance work folders or whatever other source of data management maintains with respect to [their] ratings (including Mr. Marren's);
3. copies of any and all documents and reports completed during the period covered by the 1988 officer corps rating i.e.:
(Record of Deportable Alien)
(Notice & Request for Disposition)
(Daily Activity Report)
(Bi-Weekly Time & Attendance Report)
(Report of Apprehension & Seizure)
(Smuggling Report)
(Vehicle Maintenance Report)
All documents related to WA/OSC and criminal prosecution.
Judge's Decision at 5-6.
The Respondent replied on December 28, 1987. First, the Respondent stated that the request for the Officer Corps ratings should be made to the Central Office where the Officer Corps ratings were due to be received on January 8, 1988. Second, the Respondent asserted that performance work folders are not maintained by supervisors and that no relevant material was available. Third, in regard to the request for the list of specific documents, the Respondent answered that the request was too broad, that not every piece of work product of an employee is reviewed by the supervisor, and that errors that are noted may be corrected "so that the incorrect product would not be maintained." Further, the reply said that a supervisor may use "refresher notes" for rating an employee. Id. at 6. (3)
The first category of documents sought refers to the Officer Corps ratings of the other ten border patrol agents in the bargaining unit. At the hearing before the Judge, there was a factual dispute about the existence of the documents in the second category, the performance work folders, for the period in question. Evidence was presented, however, that Martinez, Marren's second level supervisor, kept a memorandum of Marren's performance, including comments about productivity as well as other factors considered in the annual rating. In addition, Martinez kept administrative files, which could have contained comments about employees' work performance bearing on factors that comprise the rating evaluation.
Finally, the last group of items sought includes a long list of documents and work reports by the 11 border patrol agents. Daily work reports turned in by the agents on various forms constitute the production record of border patrol agents. Martinez testified that he did not have the work products or documents prepared by the agents when he rated them. Rather, he said that he used refresher notes and referred to the station log, which is completed daily. The station log, a summary of an agent's actions, records the arrest or apprehension of every alien. It shows factual data about the alien, but does not show the quality of an officer's work, or who logged in the report.
One of the Respondent's witnesses testified that he had been told it would probably take 350 hours to look through the log sheets and put together the documents sought. Tr. 59-60. Another witness for the Respondent testified that he did not know how long it would take to accumulate the requested documents for the full year of the rating period. He did testify that "if numerous employees requested this vast amount of data, . . . [w]e couldn't accomplish our primary mission," and he did not think there would be the budget to accomplish it. Tr. 170-71.
Prior to the hearing, the General Counsel served a subpoena on the Respondent requesting that the documents in question be produced at the hearing to resolve issues raised by the Respondent, such as whether the documents were relevant and necessary to the Union in fulfilling its representational duties, and certain concerns under the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a (1988). At the hearing, the General Counsel modified its request for subpoenaed documents to the 5-month period from November 28, 1986, through April 1987. In response to motions by the parties, the Judge made various rulings regarding the subpoena, including a partial denial 0f the Respondent's motion to revoke the subpoena and a refusal to grant the General Counsel's request for sanctions and a protective order.
After the hearing, the Respondent furnished to the Union the unsanitized ratings, the first category of documents sought.
IV. Administrative Law Judge's Decision
The Judge concluded that the Union was entitled to the available data requested, including the documents and reports by patrol agents for the period from November 28, 1986 through April 1987. In this regard, the Judge stated that the General Counsel had "modified the period for which it requested information" as to those dates. Judge's Decision at 5 n.7. The Judge found that the material was normally maintained, reasonably available and necessary for the Union to fulfill its representational duties, as set forth in section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute. He also found that to provide certain data would not impose an undue burden upon the Respondent or interfere with the normal functions of its organization. There was no assertion by the Respondent that the information requested constitutes guidance, advice, counsel or training for management officials or supervisors relating to collective bargaining. The Judge concluded that the refusal to furnish the information was a refusal to bargain, in violation of section 7116(a)(1) and (5) and a failure to comply with section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute, in violation of section 7116(a)(1) and (8).
Specifically with regard to the Officer Corps ratings, the Judge found that it was necessary for the Union to obtain the appraisals of the other similarly situated employees so that it could determine whether to file a grievance alleging disparate treatment. Although the Respondent had furnished all the requested information in this category after the hearing, the Judge found that the Respondent did not thereby fulfill its obligation under section 7114(b)(4), which requires that data be furnished in a timely manner. Accordingly, he found that the failure to do so violated the Statute.
With regard to the second category of information sought, the documents in performance work folders or other sources, the Judge found that information in any documents about the work performance of agents is necessary to assess whether the rating given Marren in the productivity element constituted disparate treatment.
Despite conflicting evidence as to whether performance work folders were kept during the rating year involved, the Judge noted that the Respondent kept memoranda containing comments about productivity and other administrative files that would bear on factors that comprise the rating evaluation. He therefore found a violation of the Statute in this regard and concluded that the Respondent should be directed to supply whatever pertinent documents or memoranda it has in its possession. The Judge noted that the availability of the items can best be determined during the compliance stage of the case.
With regard to the third category of information sought, the documents and reports by Patrol Agents, the Judge initially found the information to be necessary to enable the Union to decide whether to file a grievance on behalf of Marren.
The Judge found that no determination as to disparate treatment of Marren could be made in a grievance without examining the work records of the other agents. In this regard, the Judge found that "these documents would quantify the tasks performed by each employee and enable the Union to contrast Marren's productivity with his fellow workers. Obtaining these documents is therefore essential to the Union performing its representational functions." Judge's Decision at 13. The Judge also noted that although Marren's supervisor testified that he does not rely upon some of these work products by the agents in assessing their productivity, each form does measure the employee's production. Therefore, the Judge concluded "that a supervisor's failure to examine the work product should not militate against the need of the Union to evaluate such records." Id. n.16.
Although the Respondent contended that the request would require it to furnish approximately 10,000-15,000 documents and that they would be difficult to retrieve and may not be discoverable in any event, the Judge found that the request did not constitute an unreasonable burden. He stated that the original request for documents covering a twelve-month period had been shortened to a period of five months and that the General Counsel had stated on the record that a lesser number of reports would be acceptable.
In response to the Respondent's assertion that some of the data set forth in certain files, such as information about aliens, might be the basis for criminal prosecution, the Judge determined that disclosure of the names would not significantly aid the Union and that sanitization of the names of aliens in certain files would be proper. He therefore recommended an Order requiring the Respondent to provide the Union with the requested reports and documents comprising the work products for all patrol agents at Fabens Station for the period November 28, 1986 through April 1987, with the names of the aliens deleted from such data.
V. Positions of the Parties
A. General Counsel's Exceptions
The General Counsel excepts to the Judge's conclusion that the period for which information is requested was shortened from twelve months to five months and to the portion of the recommended order limiting production of the requested information to the shorter period.
The General Counsel asserts that any references in the record by the General Counsel to a reduced time frame "were made only in relation to the issue of the subpoena[,]" which was an "attempt to alleviate any alleged burden placed on the Respondent in complying with the subpoena." General Counsel's Brief in Support of Exceptions at 5. The General Counsel states that this concession was made because it did not consider documents for the entire year covered by the complaint allegation to be necessary for the Judge to be able to determine "the relevance, necessity and other legal issues surrounding the documents." Id. The General Counsel asserts that the Union needs to review the documents for the entire rating period to establish a disparate treatment claim. Moreover, the General Counsel argues that a reduction in the time frame for the requested documents could have been accomplished only by amending the complaint.
The General Counsel also excepts to various procedural rulings by the Judge regarding the subpoena. These exceptions are discussed below in the section VI of this decision.
B. Respondent's Opposition to Exceptions; Motion to Dismiss Complaint
In its opposition, the Respondent argues that it should not have to produce documents in response to the subpoena. It also argues that sanctions should not be imposed for its failure to produce the documents, because the subpoena was improper in that it sought the same information that is at issue in this case and thereby circumvents the protections provided by section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute. In addition, the Respondent argues that its concerns under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (1988) (FOIA) and the Privacy Act were legitimate and provide no basis for sanctions.
In support of its motion to dismiss, the Respondent asserts that the filing of an EEO complaint by Marren in a separate proceeding constituted an election under section 7121(d) of the Statute. The Respondent argues that, assuming the appraisals were subject to the negotiated grievance procedure, the filing of the EEO complaint, "at least 4 days before [Marren] filed his unfair labor practice charge" precludes the grievance and, therefore, eliminates the basis for the information request. Respondent's Opposition to Exceptions and Motion to Dismiss at 14.
C. General Counsel's Motion to Strike Respondent's Opposition and Respondent's Motion to Dismiss the Complaint
The General Counsel moves to strike the reference in Respondent's Opposition to its Merit Promotion and Reassignment Plan. According to the General Counsel, this "refers to an alleged agreement not introduced into the record and which therefore does not constitute record evidence in this case." General Counsel's Motion to Strike at 2.
Second, the General Counsel moves to strike Respondent's motion to dismiss the complaint, which asserts that Marren's filing of an EEO complaint was an election under section 7121(d) of the Statute that barred an unfair labor practice complaint. In this regard, the General Counsel argues that the EEO issue was not raised by the General Counsel in its exceptions and is therefore "not a valid opposition for it does not oppose anything raised by Counsel for the General Counsel. Moreover, Respondent has already filed exceptions in this case and its attempt to file cross exceptions via an opposition or motion to dismiss has already been rejected by the Authority in Marine Corps Logistics Base, Barstow, California, 33 FLRA No. 80 (1988)." General Counsel's Motion to Strike at 2-3.
VI. Analysis and Conclusions
A.Section 7121(d) Does Not Render the Request for Information in this Case Moot; Respondent's Motion to Dismiss the Complaint Is Denied
Section 7121(d) provides, in pertinent part, that an aggrieved employee affected by a prohibited personnel practice may raise the matter under a statutory procedure, such as an EEO procedure, or a negotiated grievance procedure, "but not both." The option shall be deemed to have been exercised when the employee initiates an action under the applicable statutory procedure or files a grievance in writing under the negotiated procedure, whichever occurs first.
Shortly after the Union filed, and the Respondent denied, the information request to assist the Union in deciding whether to file a grievance over border patrol agent Marren's Officer Corps rating, Marren filed an EEO complaint. From the record, it appears that the EEO complaint alleged that Marren had received a lower rating than he deserved in reprisal for having filed an earlier EEO complaint. A question is raised as to whether section 7121(d) of the Statute would preclude the filing of a grievance concerning discrimination based on Marren's Union activity.
The General Counsel asserts that as the Respondent's exceptions were untimely, this issue was raised for the first time in the Respondent's opposition to the General Counsel's exceptions. Because the General Counsel's exceptions did not raise the issue, the General Counsel argues that this defense is not properly before the Authority.(4)
For the reasons stated by the General Counsel, the Respondent's section 7121(d) defense arguably is not before us. However, the Respondent asserts, based on section 7121(d), that we must dismiss the complaint as a matter of law. In this unique circumstance, we will address the matter here. Accordingly, we deny the General Counsel's motion to strike.
In general, an agency's contention that a potential grievance is not grievable does not relieve an agency from its obligation to furnish requested information. See, for example, U.S. Department of the Air Force, Air Force Logistics Command, Sacramento Air Logistics Center, McClellan Air Force Base, California, 37 FLRA 987, 995 (1990) (McClellan Air Force Base, California), and cases cited therein. We note that at the time of the request for information and the Respondent's denial of that request, not only was there no grievance, but there also was as yet no EEO complaint.
Moreover, on the record before us, we cannot determine whether Marren's filing of an EEO complaint over his Officer Corps rating constituted an exercise of this option under section 7121(d) that would preclude the filing of a grievance. If the Union were to file a grievance, that question would be for the arbitrator ultimately to decide based on the circumstances of any such grievance. Internal Revenue Service National Office, 21 FLRA 646, 649 n.3 (1986). Therefore, section 7121(d) does not compel the dismissal of the complaint. We note that the information sought by the Union is for the purpose of investigating a potential grievance. In this regard, an examination of the information might demonstrate that no contract violation had occurred, and therefore no grievance might be filed. Accordingly, we conclude that it cannot be established that the request for information in this case is moot.
In view of the foregoing, the Respondent's motion to dismiss the complaint is denied.
B. The Judge's Rulings at the Hearing are Affirmed
Prior to the hearing, the General Counsel served a subpoena on the Respondent requesting that the documents in question be produced at the hearing. The Judge made certain rulings with regard to the subpoena, to which the General Counsel excepts.
At the hearing, the Judge granted, in part, the Respondent's petition to revoke the subpoena as to some of the documents sought. Tr. 102; 127-28. The General Counsel argues that the Judge's ruling was incorrect. The Judge ultimately determined that all of the documents were relevant and necessary to the Union's potential grievance. Thus, the ruling had no adverse effect on the General Counsel's position. Therefore, in view of these circumstances and our ultimate disposition of this case, we conclude that the ruling of the Judge was not prejudicial error.
The Judge denied the General Counsel's request for a protective order regarding the items no longer subject to the subpoena as a result of the Judge's ruling. The General Counsel's request was based on an assertion that documents returned to the Respondent were likely to be lost or destroyed "because of Respondent's history of losing or destroying such documents." General Counsel's exceptions at 11. The General Counsel argued that protection was necessary because the ultimate disclosure of the documents to the Union remained at issue in the case.
The General Counsel also asked the Judge to impose sanctions regarding documents that the Respondent asserted it could not produce because of its concerns about sanitization. The request was that the Respondent be allowed no testimony or cross examination as to the documents it would not produce, and that the Judge draw an adverse inference as to the Respondent's refusal to produce the unsanitized documents for the Judge's examination. Tr. 140; 143-44. The Judge declined to impose sanctions.
A judge has the discretion to issue protective orders and to order sanctions, including drawing inferences adverse to the position of the party refusing to produce documents. We are satisfied that the Judge did not abuse his discretion in this case. Therefore, his denial of the General Counsel's requests for a protective order and for sanctions did not constitute error. See Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland, 30 FLRA 127, 138-39 (1987).
C. The Requested Information Is Necessary
We agree with the Judge, for the reasons he stated, that all three categories of documents are necessary for the Union to exercise its representational functions in determining whether to file a grievance regarding Marren's alleged disparate treatment in his Officer Corps rating.
D. Officer Corps Ratings and Performance Work Folders
We adopt the Judge's finding, for the reasons he stated, that the Respondent violated the Statute as alleged by refusing timely to furnish the Officer Corps ratings of employees similarly situated to Marren. We also adopt his findings as to the performance work folders or other similar documents, for the reasons stated by the Judge. The Respondent will be directed to furnish whatever pertinent documents or memos it has in its possession.
E. Documents and Reports by Patrol Agents
1.The General Counsel Did Not Agree to Reduce the Number of Documents Sought by the Union In Its Request for Information
The General Counsel excepts to the Judge's finding that the General Counsel had agreed at the hearing that documents and reports covering a shorter period than stated in the complaint would be acceptable as a remedy for the alleged unfair labor practice. Rather, it asserts that the agreement to accept documents for a shorter period was expressly limited to the scope of the subpoena.
We have reviewed the record carefully, and conclude that the Judge's finding that the General Counsel agreed at the hearing to limit the scope of the documents sought under the complaint is unsupported. Therefore, our inquiry must go beyond the Judge's determination that the furnishing of five months' worth of documents, representing between 5,000 and 7,500 items, is not an unreasonable requirement. Rather, the question is whether, under the circumstances, furnishing as many as 10,000 or more documents representing the reports of the eleven border patrol agents at Fabens Station for a twelve-month period would constitute an undue burden on the Respondent and thereby lead to the conclusion that the information requested is not reasonably available.
2. Documents Covering the Twelve-Month Rating Period Are Reasonably Available
The Statute requires that reasonably available data must be provided if the other conditions of section 7114(b)(4) are met. Consistent with this requirement, an agency is not required to provide information that is available only through "extreme" or "excessive" means. Determining whether extreme or excessive means are required to retrieve available information requires a case-by-case analysis. McClellan Air Force Base, California, 37 FLRA at 994; Department of Health and Human Services, Social Security Administration, 36 FLRA 943, 950 (1990) (Social Security Administration).
The Authority has held that it was not unreasonable to require production of records that would take three weeks to retrieve, especially where it appeared that some of the effort was due to the method of recordkeeping chosen by the agency. Social Security Administration, 36 FLRA at 950-51. Information also was found to be reasonably available where it would take an agency three to four weeks to write a new computer program that would be needed to retrieve the data. Department of the Air Force, Headquarters, Air Force Logistics Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, 28 FLRA 306 (1987), reversed as to other matters sub nom. FLRA v. Department of the Air Force, Headquarters, Air Force Logistics Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, No. 87-1387 (D.C. Cir. Aug. 9, 1990). And in a case involving these same parties and virtually identical data, it was not established that approximately 5,000 sanitized items maintained in different sections and offices of the agency could be produced only through extreme or excessive means. U.S. Department of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Border Patrol, El Paso, Texas, 37 FLRA 1310, 1323-24 (1990) (INS, Border Patrol).
On the other hand, data was not found to be reasonably available where it "could have included information contained in personnel files maintained by over 6,000 first level supervisors, as well as hundreds of disciplinary files from various . . . personnel offices." Department of the Air Force, Headquarters, Air Force Logistics Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, and Department of the Air Force, Ogden Air Logistics Center, Hill Air Force Base, Utah, 21 FLRA 529, 532 (1986).
There is little record evidence in this case regarding the means necessary to retrieve the work documents of the agents for the twelve-month rating period. One witness, based only on what he had been told, estimated that it would take more than 350 hours. Another witness could give no estimate of how long it would take, but nevertheless concluded that the impact on the mission of the Respondent "if numerous employees requested this vast amount of data" would be so great that "[w]e couldn't accomplish our primary mission," and that he did not think there would be the budget to do it. Tr. 170-71.
These estimates were made at the hearing after the Respondent had substantially gathered the five months' worth of documents required to comply with the subpoena. There is no indication that the Respondent's primary mission or budget were adversely affected by that effort, which is a significant indicator of the work necessary to retrieve the requested documents for the full twelve months.
In all the circumstances, in our view it has not been shown that production of the documents would require extreme or excessive means. Therefore, we conclude that the Respondent has not established that the requested information was not reasonably available within the meaning of section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute.
3. The Documents May Be Sanitized
The Judge found that sanitization of the names of aliens who are the subject of some of the documents would be proper, and based this conclusion on an uncontradicted finding that disclosure of such names would not significantly aid the Union in processing its grievance. He noted that some of the personal information set forth in the documents pertaining to aliens might be the basis for criminal prosecutions.
The General Counsel does not dispute the finding that disclosure of the names of aliens would not significantly aid the Union in processing its grievance. However, the General Counsel does argue that some of the documents released under the subpoena "were so heavily sanitized as to be non-documents." General Counsel's exceptions at 12. Thus, this case is distinguishable from INS, Border Patrol, 37 FLRA at 1324, where no such assertion was made, and where it was not necessary to analyze the scope of disclosure under the Privacy Act.
We conclude that the Privacy Act applies to at least some of the individuals named in some of the documents sought, and therefore that sanitization is necessary to protect the privacy of those individuals before the documents can lawfully be released.
We disagree with the General Counsel's assertion that the Privacy Act does not apply to any of the documents involved because they contain information about illegal aliens who are not protected by the Privacy Act. The Privacy Act applies to "a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence." 5 U.S.C. § 552a(a)(2). Although it is clear that many of the documents concern only illegal aliens who would not be protected by the Privacy Act, it is not clear from the face of a given document whether a particular subject was an illegal alien. Moreover, even where the subject of a document appears to be an illegal alien, the individual's status may not have been finally adjudicated.
The General Counsel's second basis for arguing that the Privacy Act does not apply is that the Respondent has not shown that the documents are contained in a system of records. The Privacy Act precludes disclosure of records contained in a system of records. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b). The term "record" means:
any item, collection, or grouping of information about an individual that is maintained by an agency, including, but not limited to, his education, financial transactions, medical history, and criminal or employment history and that contains his name, or the identifying number, symbol, or other identifying particular assigned to the individual, such as a finger or voice print or a photograph[.]
5 U.S.C. § 552a(a)(4). A "system of records" is "a group of any records under the control of any agency from which information is retrieved by the name of the individual or by some identifying number, symbol, or other identifying particular assigned to the individual[.]" 5 U.S.C. § 552a(a)(5).
The General Counsel has not shown how the documents fall outside these definitions. Indeed, the record shows that the Respondent was able to retrieve a large number of the documents requested pursuant to the subpoena. It is unlikely that it could have done so if the documents were not maintained in a system of records. We conclude that the evidence is sufficient to establish that the documents are maintained in a system of records within the meaning of the Privacy Act. Accordingly, we conclude that the Privacy Act applies to at least some of the information sought.
With certain exceptions, the Privacy Act bars unconsented disclosure by Federal agencies of information about individuals. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(2). See U.S. Department of the Navy, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, 37 FLRA 515 (1990) (Portsmouth), application for enforcement filed sub nom. FLRA v. U.S. Department of the Navy, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, No. 90-1949 (1st Cir. Oct. 1, 1990). As pertinent here, the relevant exception is contained in 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(2), which concerns disclosure required by the FOIA. In turn, the FOIA permits an agency to exempt from disclosure investigatory records compiled for law enforcement purposes, to the extent that the production of such records would "constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy[.]" 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C). See generally, United States Dept. of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 109 S. Ct. 1468 (1989) (Reporters Committee).
The documents sought clearly are records compiled for law enforcement purposes. Therefore, the Respondent could refuse to disclose those documents to the extent that they constitute "an unwarranted invasion of privacy."
The United States Supreme Court has held that the policy of full disclosure embodied in the FOIA "focuses on the citizens' right to be informed about 'what their government is up to.'" Reporters Committee, 109 S. Ct. at 1481. In Portsmouth, the Authority recognized that in cases involving information requested by a union in the course of fulfilling its representational functions under the Statute, the appropriate public interest to be applied is the facilitation of the collective bargaining process in the Federal sector. 37 FLRA at 524-31. Under either analysis, we see little or no public interest to be served by releasing the names or personal identifiers of aliens or other subjects, such as confidential informants or smugglers of aliens, contained in various reports requested by the Union. In particular, to assess whether to file a grievance regarding Marren's Officer Corps rating, the Union needs only information that will enable it to compare the work products of the eleven agents. The General Counsel has not shown why such a comparison cannot be made without the names and personal identifiers contained on the forms.
In contrast, the privacy interest of individuals who are the subject of the various reports could be substantial. From various documents, for example, confidential sources could be identified; arrest records and other facts about the aliens--some of whom may in fact be in this country legally--could be disclosed; and names and other information about individuals alleged to have illegally smuggled aliens into the country could be apparent.
In these circumstances, we conclude on balance that the release of these documents in unsanitized form would constitute "an unwarranted invasion of privacy" within the meaning of the Privacy Act. In order to safeguard against such an invasion of privacy, we will order appropriate sanitization of any documents subject to 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C). Any disputes that may arise as to the proper extent of sanitization are appropriate for resolution at the compliance stage of this case. INS, Border Patrol, 37 FLRA at 1325.
VII. Summary
The information requested by the Union is normally maintained by the Respondent in the regular course of business; is reasonably available and necessary for the Union to determine whether to file a grievance on behalf of an employee; and does not constitute guidance, advice, counsel, or training provided for management officials or supervisors, relating to collective bargaining. Therefore, we find that the Respondent was required, by section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute, to supply the requested information to the Union and its failure to do so violated section 7116(a)(1), (5) and (8) of the Statute, as alleged.
VIII. Order
Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations and section 7118 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, the Department of Justice, United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, United States Border Patrol, El Paso, Texas, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Failing and refusing to furnish to the American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO National Border Patrol Council, the exclusive representative of its employees, the available data requested in the Union's letter dated December 7, 1987, for the period November 1986 through November 1987, for the purpose of enabling the Union to perform its representational duties relating to the evaluation and processing of grievances. The data may be sanitized as necessary to protect the privacy of individuals under the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a and the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552.
(b) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining or coercing its employees in the exercise of rights assured by the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.
2. Take the following affirmative action in order to effectuate the purposes and policies of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute:
(a) Furnish to the American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, National Border Patrol Council, the exclusive representative of its employees, the available data requested in the Union's letter dated December 7, 1987, for the period November 1986 through November 1987, for the purpose of enabling the Union to perform its representational duties relating to the evaluation and processing of grievances. The data may be sanitized as necessary to protect the privacy of individuals under the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a, and the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552.
(b) Post at its facilities at El Paso, Texas and Fabens, Texas, copies of the attached Notice on forms to be furnished by the Federal Labor Relations Authority. Upon receipt of such forms, they shall be signed by the Regional Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Southern Regional Office, Dallas, Texas, and shall be posted and maintained for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all bulletin boards and other places where notices to employees are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken to ensure that such Notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
(c) Pursuant to section 2423.30 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, notify the Regional Director, Dallas Regional Office, Federal Labor Relations Authority, in writing, within 30 days from the date of this Order, as to what steps have been taken to comply.
WE WILL NOT fail and refuse to furnish to the American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, National Border Patrol Council, the exclusive representative of our employees, the available data, sanitized as necessary, requested in the Union's letter dated December 7, 1987, for the period November 1986 through November 1987, for the purpose of enabling the Union to perform its representational duties relating to the evaluation and processing of grievances.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner, interfere with, restrain, or coerce our employees in the exercise of their rights assured by the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.
WE WILL furnish to the American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, National Border Patrol Council, the exclusive representative of our employees, the available data, sanitized as necessary, requested in the Union's letter dated December 7, 1987, for the period November 1986 through November 1987, for the purpose of enabling the Union to perform its representational duties relating to the evaluation and processing of grievances.
Dated: By:
(Signature) (Title)
This Notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting and must not be altered, defaced or covered by any other material.
If employees have any questions concerning this Notice or compliance with any of its provisions, they may communicate directly with the Regional Director, Dallas Regional Office, Federal Labor Relations Authority, whose address is: Federal Office Building, 525 Griffin Street, Suite 926, Dallas, TX 75202, and whose telephone number is: (214) 767-4996.
(If blank, the decision does not have footnotes.)
1. In view of this determination, it is unnecessary to consider the General Counsel's alternative motion to strike certain portions of the Respondent's exceptions.
2. The reason for Marren's concern despite the high overall rating was that the individual element ratings yield a point total, which determines an employee's location on the promotion or transfer rosters. Tr. 74.
3. On January 11, 1988, Marren filed an EEO complaint against the Respondent alleging that the Respondent had discriminated against him in his Officer Corps rating because he had filed an earlier EEO complaint. Judge's Decision at 9. The record does not disclose the exact wording of this complaint.
4. The General Counsel also moved to strike a portion of the Respondent's Opposition to the General Counsel's Exceptions that referred to a document not introduced into the record. As that document was not necessary to our disposition of this case, it is unnecessary to pass on that aspect of the General Counsel's motion.


text:
With challenges around the duplication of efforts and recognizing the urgent need for effective coordination of delivery of aid in north-east Nigeria, Nigeria INGO Forum (NIF) was born in October 2014. As of November 2018, NIF has a membership of 46 INGOs with 5 observers. With the ongoing scale up as a result of the increased global, political and financial attention that the Lake Chad Basin, specifically north-east Nigeria received in 2017, it is now more important than ever to have a cohesive operational stance and a collective voice when addressing critical challenges. NIF derives its mandate from members' needs and is intended to function only as long as required.
Vision and Mission
The Nigeria INGO Forum (NIF) exists to provide a collective voice for members to elevate humanitarian operational realities and challenges nationally, regionally and internationally. Through strengthening coordination within the Forum, increasing information sharing and fostering partnerships with all actors, including the Government of Nigeria, United Nations, national NGOs and donors, NIF works as the critical link protecting and promoting principled effective delivery of much needed aid to affected populations.


text:
Dynamic regulation of cardiolipin by the lipid pump, ATP8b1, determines the severity of lung injury in experimental bacterial pneumonia
Published Date:Sep 19 2010
Source:Nat Med. 16(10):1120-1127.
Personal Authors:
Pubmed ID:20852622
Pubmed Central ID:PMC4500192
Description:Pneumonia remains the leading cause of death from infection in the US, yet fundamentally new conceptual models underlying its pathogenesis have not emerged. We show that humans and mice with bacterial pneumonia have markedly elevated amounts of cardiolipin, a rare, mitochondrial-specific phospholipid, in lung fluid and find that it potently disrupts surfactant function. Intratracheal cardiolipin administration in mice recapitulates the clinical phenotype of pneumonia, including impaired lung mechanics, modulation of cell survival and cytokine networks and lung consolidation. We have identified and characterized the activity of a unique cardiolipin transporter, the P-type ATPase transmembrane lipid pump Atp8b1, a mutant version of which is associated with severe pneumonia in humans and mice. Atp8b1 bound and internalized cardiolipin from extracellular fluid via a basic residue-enriched motif. Administration of a peptide encompassing the cardiolipin binding motif or Atp8b1 gene transfer in mice lessened bacteria-induced lung injury and improved survival. The results unveil a new paradigm whereby Atp8b1 is a cardiolipin importer whose capacity to remove cardiolipin from lung fluid is exceeded during inflammation or when Atp8b1 is defective. This discovery opens the door for new therapeutic strategies directed at modulating the abundance or molecular interactions of cardiolipin in pneumonia.
Document Type:
Funding:HL068135/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
HL080229/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
HL081784/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
HL094488/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
HL096376/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
HL097376/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
HL098174/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
HL70755/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
K08 HL083101/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
K23 HL075402/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
K23 HL075402/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
OH008282/OH/NIOSH CDC HHS/United States
R01 HL096376/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
U01 HL102288/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
Main Document Checksum:urn:sha256:f2e963a2aad3de426e1ca45a78ff07420c07c602669deea825b3bd586e138be6
Supporting Files:
image/jpeg image/gif image/jpeg image/gif image/jpeg text/plain application/pdf text/plain image/gif image/jpeg image/gif image/jpeg image/gif image/jpeg image/gif
No Related Documents.
You May Also Like:


text:
He found himself wondering at times, especially in the Autumn, about the wild lands, and strange visions of mountains that he had never seen came into his dreams. – J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
I can't help it, I'm obsessed with autumn. And it goes (too) well with my everlasting Tolkien-fandom.
So just for fun, here's a silly little to-do list for a Lord of the Rings-y fall:
- Every time you light a candle, shout "The beacons are lit! GONDOR CALLS FOR AID!" [ ]
- Proceed to prance about for a while, building tension, before finally proclaiming "and Rohan will answer!" [ ]
- Accidentally get spider web in your hair and bird poo on your clothes but roll with it and claim you're cosplaying Radagast. [ ]
- See a flock of birds migrate south. Hide and whisper "Crebain from Dunland!" [ ]
- Encourage and study with your classmates before the big exam. When they leave, mumble "I give hope to men. I leave none for myself". Bonus points for a far-off gaze and dejected posture. [ ]
- Discover the sun no longer burnsss and agree to spend time outside again with the explanation "I come back to you now… at the turn of the tide." [ ]
- Yell "Mellon! Meellllloooon!" at your work computer (and anything else you've forgotten the password to during the summer). [ ]
The last but very important step:
- Ignore your girl/boyfriend's exasperated sighs. I found this to be key. [ ]
Good job! You are done and have successfully eliminated all chances of seeming like a normal and well-functioning human being. : D (Y)
Btw, I hope you all had a lovely weekend! I went to see some friends and had so much fun. We played Keep Talking And Nobody Explodes and Until Dawn and I did scream, but not as much as I expected. I think I'm getting braver. Or just more determined to not make people around me go deaf.
Anyhow, I'll see you in a week, cheers!


text:
STELLA - Dynamic Simulation ModelingPosted On Saturday, January 9, 2010 at at 1/09/2010 08:32:00 PM by Brandy Anderson
As I continue to search for CT curriculum modules, I stumbled over a dynamic simulation model called STELLA. Back in grad school, I spent a fair amount of time constructing an environmental model with STELLA. From my experience, it was fairly easy to learn because of its conceptual nature. Check out some recently constructed models.
Also, this modeling program could be used outside STEM disciplines. Here is an English Language Arts example of STELLA being used to analyze the characters of Hamlet.


text:
We are Certified Shopify Plus Partners
Shopify Plus offers businesses enterprise-grade capabilities without the costs and struggles of traditional options. We are one of the first companies Shopify selected to represent this platform.
Shopify Plus is leading the way
Shopify is the leading ecommerce platform serving over 500,000 merchants world-wide. Shopify Plus is their product specifically built to serve high volume, global brands looking for a reliable, scalable commerce platform to grow their business on.
Would like to know more about Shopify Plus? Let's talk.
Making the switch to Shopify Plus
We helped dozens of businesses make the switch to Shopify Plus. With our ability to move quickly and a proven record of award-winning design, we are confident we can help your company transition quickly and successfully to Shopify Plus.
Do you need help migrating to Shopify Plus? Let's talk.
Recent Shopify Plus projects
Partnering with great brands—doing great things
We were one of the original agencies choosen to represent Shopify Plus as official Shopify Plus Partners. Over the years, we have helped dozens of stores to migrate to and start new on the Shopify Plus platform.
Are you interested in learning more about Shopify Plus? Reach out to our team.


text:
I honestly didn't think I had to explain this, but here goes. When you take something such as rational discussion about some disagreement and gender it as masculine you are reinforcing sexist stereotypes, even and especially if the masculine gendering is supposed to be bad. To reduce rational argumentation to nothing more than rams butting horns is just to reinforce the old Aristotelian idea of men as rational and women as not. Gendering things that aren't in themselves gendered is one of the primary ways sexism succeeds.
So does making public places into Mad Men/locker-room atmospheres through bullying uses of vulgarity. With respect to this, a good general rule of thumb is that if it would count as hostile environment sexual harassment in the workplace, then you should not do it on public social media.
I perhaps too obliquely called out Felonius Screwtape, AKA Bob the Phenomenologist, on both of these things in this post , which he's replied to on his public facebook feed. Since they are very NSFW, I'll put them after the fold:
so Jon Cogburn, who has nothing better to do with his life, decided to write a long, patronizing, and ultimately pointless blog post about my "dickbanging" comment last week--and best of all, he even decided to include a "trigger warning" because of my mixture of "violent sexual imagery" and "unoriginal machismo" (proof that he's never met me). And since we haven't met and aren't friends on facebook, i find that writing a blog post about comments i made there while freely (viz. ignorantly) speculating about my motives and my inner pyschology is really quite stalkerish and pathologically creepy. Yes, Jon (since i'm sure you have a google alert on your name and will likely respond with 6000 words following your traditional rhetorical strategy), you're behaving like a pathological weirdo, and you need to get a grip. Find a hobby. Go outside, Marcel.
O.K. (1) The facebook post was public, and people e-mailed me about it. In no way did I violate his privacy. I was also assured by several people that everyone knows who Bob is in the real world. I know who he is (we have friends in common), and get the joke about "proof that he never met me," a joke which is a complete non-sequitur. But I won' t explain why, because as far as I can tell his real identity is not officially public on his facebook account, and I'm not willing to say anything that would lead anyone not already in on the joke to suss out his identity. (2) At no point have I speculated about Bob's motives or inner psychology. Please follow the link above to my post. I rather noted that his comments were sexist and an instance of the very kind of stupid unoriginal macho energy he pretends to decry (but not in evidence in Adriell Trott's original post, my response, or the discussion that ensued). (3) For what it's worth, I have several hobbies and and still manage to blog, help the mission of my church, maintain a decent CV, and help raise two children. It took about twenty minutes to write the post responding pretty gracefully to Bob's vituperative demeaning gendering/sexualization of myself. I don't know what's motivating the "nothing better to do with his life/get a hobby," but it makes no sense. (4) Once again there's a performative contradiction. His first post was a paradigm instance of any negative behaviors that might be inferentially tied up to accusations of "dickbanging." And here one might ask if Bob has anything better to do with his life than two comments and four of these "dickbanging" posts. Is it really that much more of a waste of time to explain why the manner in which he's done so creates a hostile environment?
Second, 10/26/14 10:18 AM:
it's been at least 24 hours since i've said #dickbanging. #dickbanging, #dickbanging, #dickbanging. Oh, pardon me, i forgot to say "trigger warning." #dickbanging.
This is misleading. I didn't criticize Bob for merely using the locution. Again, please read the post above. And can I make a sleight observation? This is the public facebook page of someone whose identity is known by I think every continental philosopher I know. Yet nobody has called him on it in any of the six comments and posts. In fact multiple people have liked each post. This one got 23 likes and eight comments, and no critical words. The original dick-banging posts got likes by luminaries in continental philosophy such as Tom Eyers (whose great book on Lacan I'm actually reading now) and Babbette Babich as well as hundreds of comments, not one of them critical.
What if Brian Leiter had said the same things? Of course he'd be roundly denounced by many of Bob's facebook friends. What's the song say? "And justice is a fickle thing // One law for the common man and another for the king;" replace "the king" with "one of our hip friends" and/or "someone publicly against philosophical movements that I find threatening" and you get exactly what's going on here.
Third, 10/26/14 4:23 PM:
Excessive #dickbanging can lead to Cockburn
Har. Har. Har. I've never heard that one before.
Seriously though, is this what we want to be teaching our students? That it's O.K. to create this kind of atmosphere? I'm positive that many of the people commenting on Bob's blog and liking these posts have sat through lectures on hostile environment sexual harassment. Bob has clearly not done anything illegal. But there are ethical reasons that hostile environment sexual harassment is illegal in the workplace, and these reasons surely apply to social media associated with our profession as well. In addition, the moral reasoning in the relevant court cases finding it possible for men to commit hostile environment sexual harassment against other men is surely relevant here. In the original post to which I took exception Bob compared people who work in Speculative Realism to "middle class white boys" in pornographic films and also said we were masturbating as well as doing the thing on the table with our genitals.
Finally, I don't know why it's so hard for people just to admit to screwing up. Anyone who has taken a freshman level Women and Gender Studies class can explain to you why the posts are obviously problematic. So why be defensive about this? Why circle the wagons? There's not that much at stake in this kind of thing if you just apologize and move on. I'm not trying to argue that Bob's a bad person. We have mutual friends. I took exception to two comments and four posts he made which demeaningly sexualized me and others, gendered things which should not be gendered, and helped to create/sustain the kind of hostile environment too endemic to academic philosophy. But everybody reading this has done worse, and the very fact that nobody has called Bob on this (and in fact that named philosophers signed off on it) is actually pretty exculpatory with respect to him. We're intrinsically social creatures, and if Bob finds himself in a social millieu that accepts and celebrates these kinds of public displays of sexism, then that's not really on him.
Again, what would any of the people who like these posts do if Brian Leiter carried on this way? Isn't it perfectly obvious? And these are named philosophers too. I call shenaningans.


text:
what going on?
Luke's exultance at being selected for The Skulls (a secret society bred within the walls of a prominent Ivy League Campus) is soon overshadowed when he realises that all is 'not well in Wonderland'. For The Skulls is a breeding ground for the future powerful and elite. It's not only a far cry from his working class background, but it also hallows its own deep and dark secrets.
Original title The Skulls
IMDb Rating 5.6 29,066 votes
TMDb Rating 5.6242 votes
Lucas "Luke" McNamara
Caleb Mandrake
Will Beckford
Chloe Whitfield
Martin Lombard
Detective Sparrow
Ames Levritt
Litten Mandrake
Jason Pitcairn
Travis Wheeler


text:
Professor must be supervised for three years after improperly pursuing emotional relationship with patientBMJ 2018; 363 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k4302 (Published 11 October 2018) Cite this as: BMJ 2018;363:k4302
- Clare Dyer
- The BMJ
A professor of clinical nephrology at King's College Hospital in London who told a patient that he was "a bit infatuated" with her must work under supervised conditions for three years after a medical practitioners' tribunal accepted his claim that he did not want a sexual relationship, but found that he had improperly pursued an emotional one.
Iain Macdougall, 57, telephoned five times and left a voicemail over a few days in 2016, telling a patient who struggled with alcoholism that "you kind of, slightly, got under my skin" and that "you should take it as a massive compliment that you attract doctors."
The 62 year old woman recorded some of the calls and reported Macdougall to the hospital. The medical practitioners' tribunal in Manchester heard the …
Log in
Log in using your username and password
Log in through your institution
Subscribe from £138 *
Subscribe and get access to all BMJ articles, and much more.
* For online subscription
Access this article for 1 day for:
£30 / $37 / €33 (plus VAT)
You can download a PDF version for your personal record.


text:
Shop now
Low In Stock
This hydrating mud mask uses the latest advanced technologies, providing deep extreme hydration for instant results and long term benefits. THIRSTYMUD hydrates, moisturises, replenishes and soothes the skin, leaving you with a healthy glowing complexion.
- Suitable for men and women of all ages, and all skin types, perfect as a post-shaving treatment.


text:
Room Details
This spacious and attractive first floor guest room is decorated in a soothing green and features three stunning stained glass bay windows overlooking the garden. The king sized bed is very comfortable and cozy and the room comes equipped with a TV, large en suite bathroom with walk-in shower, and workstation. Check out is 11:00 am and Check in is from 3:00 pm to 7:00 pm For rates and availability click on the Book Now button
The Philadelphian is not wheelchair accessible


text:
Friday, January 11, 2013
Painting Faces With Ink
This is a single layer of ink over an existing screening that took maybe 3 minutes. I did nothing to her left eye (facing you) and nothing to her top lip. Her right eye has one stroke of black over the upper eyelash. Her brow bone has one stroke of sepia that was immediately shaded and smeared downward using a dry paint brush. Her bottom lip has one stroke of magenta that was shaded upward using a dry brush.
A single layer is very subtle but you can still see a difference. The more layers you add, of course, the deeper and richer the color. You can use a dry brush or dry q-tip for shading. If you don't like it, you can use a wet q-tip to remove the ink, but you have to do it quickly.
Next I'm going to do a complete repaint using my half Bratz face that lost its screening in 100% acetone. Although you can get [white ink in a bottle] or a ["ivory" ink pen] (scroll downward at the links), I've never purchased or tried any, so I'm just using plain white paint for the eye whites. You can put this on with a brush or sponge.
Except for the white in her eyes, everything else is strictly ink. I used black, sepia, green, dark yellow and red. This took me about an hour to do. Yes, I know it's very sloppy, but I never said I could paint or draw a straight line, for that matter. 0.o This is multiple layers (3-4) of ink blended with a dry brush. The dry brush technique isn't a necessity, because you can blend the different inks with each other just by stroking one layer over the other.
From a distance, this repaint ain't half bad, so imagine what you could achieve if you have a steady hand or can actually paint. The best tip I can give is to create highlights by stroking a light color over a darker one. It will take away some of the color underneath leaving you with a gradual blended change. Also, clean off the tips of your pens by stroking over a piece of white paper until the true color shows. Otherwise, all that blending will leave you with messy tips.
Hope this helps ^_^.
39 comments:
Thanks for posting this! I'm going to soon start my first total face repaint, so this will be handy when that time rolls around.ReplyDelete
Good tip on the highlighting. Thanks.ReplyDelete
Great job Muff! Thanks for the tutorial.ReplyDelete
Great job, Muff and thanks for the links. The last time I tried painting a Barbie's face I was about 8 and used a biro which bled into the plastic. You can imagine the result. Maybe I should try again.ReplyDeleteReplies
Hi, Carrickters and you're welcome! If you do try painting again, please post some photos.Delete
@Muff - thanks for sharing these tips. I'll refer back to them when I do my repainting ;-DDelete
@Carrickters - OMG, I used ballpoint ink on some of my dolls, too. Bad choice indeed ;-{
You're welcome, Dana! LOL, I used to use an ink pen to draw on my jeans when I was a teenager. Good times.Delete
It's just wonderful what you make with those ink markers, I have not tried yet my first repaint, I'm too afraid of making a total crap!! Thanks for the tutorial, I found it very useful.ReplyDelete
Ah steady hands...my biggest dream ever.ReplyDelete
The repaint seems to be really nice, i think that with a bit of practice you will be good, really good. I could upload MY attempts, but my pride forbade me :)
Your tutorials are as ever helpful and interesting, thanks so much for sharing!
Thanks Muff! I am recently experimenting with a few things and it just wasnt turning out right like I hoped but i will go back and try these methods!!! Thanks!!ReplyDelete
I really like the outcome of your Bratz re-ink!ReplyDelete
I couldn't have done it better myself xD I like the colors a lot and the shading is very nice! I bet that if you practise for a while you could be a great re-inker!
Hi Muf, it's great and useful tutorial. Congratulations !!!ReplyDelete
Greetings from Poland ;)
Another amazing tutorial :) I'd like to do repaints, sadly I don't have a good hands and the por doll turns out like a transReplyDelete
Actually, I've been wondering whether bottled acrylic ink would be good for doll repaints, or if it's too diluted. I guess as long as you have the patience for several coats it should be fine. :)ReplyDeleteReplies
Anderson, this might sound weird, but if you apply a "dry layer" then yes, multi coats will be fine. And by that I mean don't have a heavily loaded brush. If you dip it, then wipe the excess off the side of the bottle and then brush the tip against a paper towel before laying it on a doll, you'll get "dry" application instead of a "wet" one.Delete
But I dunno, I wonder what a wet, watercolor effect would look like. Hmmm.
Very informative, Muff! Thanks for the tips and the links. I agree with Georgia Girl and Carrickters, you did a great job for this demonstration.ReplyDelete
Muchas gracias¡¡¡ muy buenos consejos¡¡¡¡¡ genial¡ReplyDelete
Hello from Spain: awesome paint job. You are very skillful. I can not do anything. Keep in touchReplyDelete
Nice job! I love her new look. Any sealing required or no?ReplyDeleteReplies
Hiya, Vanessa! If you are going to be touching the face in any way then yes, I would seal with satin varnish for the lips (or gloss if you want them wet looking) and matte varnish for anything else.Delete
Often times I don't seal because I'm not a big face toucher, but when I do, I wait a day before applying anything because if you seal immediately after inking you are likey to stroke the ink off.
Hi Muff, you inspired me to do a doll head/body transfer. I was afraid of doing it before because I thought I would mess up a perfectly good doll, but I didn't. I'll be posting pictures later on my blog if you want to see the results. Thanks for the inspiration!ReplyDeleteReplies
You give me so much inspiration! I really admire your courage to experiment with dolls. Please, feel appreciated with this nomination: http://ihime.blogspot.com/2013/01/liebster-blog.html :)ReplyDelete
Hi I like your repaints! I do have a question though once you repaint the head can you take your repaint off or does it stain the vinyl?ReplyDeleteReplies
Hi, Mara and welcome! Short answer to your question is yes, you can take off your repaint with pure acetone (faster) or nail polish remover (slower). Does it stain the vinyl is a trickier response. Staining depends on several factors; the quality of the ink, the quality of the vinyl and whether or not you sealed the head with varnish before you put any ink or paint on it.Delete
Please take a look at these other posts of mine where I go into depth on my inking techniques and attempts. Scroll all the way down in the Bieber post and you'll see a section on inking and longevity concerns.
Adventures in Repainting, Take 2
A Tale of Two Biebers
If you read through those or not, in any case, here is my final answer to the second part of your question. Using pure acetone, I just removed 1/2 of the faces from every male doll in the Adventures in Repainting, Take 2 post. So, I can say with certainty, that 1 year and 2 months later, none of those dolls were stained by Faber Castell ink. However, eye socket areas where I applied the white Gelly Roll pen are clearly lighter than their original vinyl. The only way to insure that the vinyl does not stain is to seal it with varnish before you apply any inks or paint. None of my dolls were sealed before I started.
Hope this helps!


text:
I had two distinct moments as a child when I suddenly noticed the pure bliss I was in because of music. (Thank you Ella Fitzgerald and Paul Simon.) This sparked the passion in me to pass this magnificent joy on. Then after a particularly potent cup of coffee one day in 2004 I daydreamed that if I had two weeks to live, I would create an album with that time.
Much longer than two weeks later came the birth of my first record Undulating, a collection of a cappella songs that go spelunking into the nature of mind. It was performed live by a group of fabulously talented friends in Portland, Oregon, and we called ourselves The Jellyfish Chorus. A few years later came The Pickle Jar, a full band experience that explores turning life's pickles into beautiful sunsets. This album has traveled around the world (including on airplane radio stations) and won CDBaby Editor's Pick of the Week upon it's release.
Then came the surprise twist of creating a children's album A Day in the Life of a Boogaleeboo (for more info head here to Lesley & the Flying Foxes). It was a wonderful assignment from the gods to return to the simple and silly, and received a Parent's Choice Gold Award.
And now... the release of my new album A Calm Sun! This Americana record was made in my hometown, Los Angeles, with an incredible cast of musicians and producers. Unlike the very eclectic previous albums, this newest creation carries a country/folk tenderness throughout the entire record. I spent 2017 touring and offering this music in Europe and the US, and what a rich, joyful experience that has been! I'm looking forward to many exciting endeavors in 2018...


text:
John 13:1-17
FIRST LESSON Matthew 16:13-20
TIME FOR CHILDREN Acts 3:1-10
April 24, 2016
So take a look at that sandal in the bulletin.
That sandal was not much protection for feet, if you think of it. It didn't protect the toes or the tops of the feet or the ankles. It didn't protect from the cold. Or the rain. It didn't protect much from rocks or sharp stones on the path, or clumps of soil sticking up, or from snake bites or wagon wheels - not to mention whatever donkeys left behind them on the road. The feet in those sandals are pretty much unprotected.
Now think about the man who might have worn those sandals – Peter, for instance. And think about his feet. He may have been about fifty years old. He was a fisherman, used to walking along the rocky coastline of the lakeshore on Lake Galilee. He had walked up and down hills and through the dessert and in small villages and cities in those flimsy sandals for about seventy-five miles here and there - just in the last three years, following Jesus. Those feet were calloused and permanently stained and grimy and filthy and he had probably broken his toes and his toenails countless times. These are some ugly feet we are looking at here!
And on the last night of Jesus' life, after he had finished his last supper with Peter and the others, Jesus wrapped a towel around his waist. He took a basin of water and knelt in front of each of them, one by one, and washed their feet. But Peter wasn't having any of it. He wanted to tuck his filthy, ugly feet under his long robes and hide them and he protested. Knowing Peter, he probably protested loudly. But Jesus had one last lesson for Peter – one final loving gift.
Usually, you know, it was servants or slaves who washed peoples' feet. Anybody who was wealthy enough to have guests to dinner also had slaves, and before the guests sat down to dinner, the slaves would wash people's feet. Which were probably hot and dirty and dusty. It was the mark of a truly gracious host.
But Peter says to Jesus, "I don't want you being a slave to me. I won't have it."
And Jesus may have said something to Peter like this: "Peter, you've struggled and suffered alongside me for three years. You've been homeless and penniless with me and you've heard every word I said and you've seen everything I've done. You, more than any of the others, know and understand who I am. You've heard the people who have hated me and they are powerful people and you have stuck with me anyway. But you can't really belong to me if you don't let me wash your feet. There is one more, last, lesson you need to learn from me. One more loving experience between us. You need to learn to be vulnerable with me. You have been strong, and proud and very, very active with me. You have said all the right words about me, with great conviction. You have made rash, bold promises to me. Now you need to show me another side. You need let me see your ugly feet, and you need to let me wash them, callouses and all. And unless you let me do that you can't be a part of me."
And for us, the story is all the more poignant and powerful. Jesus knew that in this loving circle of friends he had created, two of them would fail him badly in his last hours. Judas would betray him to people hated him and Peter would deny that he ever knew him. And in that moment around the table he could have accused them, and he could have screamed at them and denounced them. But the Creator and King of Heaven and Earth quietly wraps a towel around his waist and kneels on the floor in front of them and does the chore of a servant for them.
And Jesus says to us, "Unless I wash your filthy feet you can't be a part of me."
So we look deep into ourselves. We recall all the good we have done in Jesus' name. We remember all the money we have given to the One Great Hour of Sharing offering and to this church. We remember the funds that we have lovingly given to Renae Venman toward her Mission Trip to Brazil in a couple of weeks, and to the Mel Trotter Ministries. We think about all the clothing and food we have given to very good places for Jesus' other children. And all the kindnesses we have done and all the care we have given to others.
And we look deep into ourselves again and we shamefully recall all the times we have spent our other money wastefully on all the wrong things. And all the times we have been secretly proud of ourselves for being better than the homeless people at Mel Trotter. And all the times we were so preoccupied with dressing well and looking well and presenting a good image of ourselves that we did not notice the hurts of others.
Let's have a moment of silence to sit with our filthy feet in front of Jesus and let him see that side of us. And allow him to wash our feet.
And then Jesus says to us, "Now that I have washed your feet, you should also wash one another's feet." Which might even be harder still. We won't have a pedicure first and we won't clip our toenails first. We will simply take off our shoes and our socks and show each other our feet.
Now I have been your temporary part time pastor for about eighteen months. For me they have been beautiful, very blessed months. I have watched some of you do the very hard work of forgiveness and healing and I have been blessed to sit with you. A great deal of the anger and hurt and conflict and mistrust in this church is gone, and I watch every Sunday now how long you stay in coffee hour chatting with each other and I can't get you into worship on time because you're all off talking away and laughing with each other in Teeuwissen Hall. I have seen how you have eaten enormous amounts of very good food that the Membership Committee provides. I have watched how you are able to look across huge differences and work together and worship together well. I have watched the elders on the session slog through the tough stuff together and come to consensus. I have watched the deacons care for you all.
But I have not seen many of you take off your shoes and socks and show your feet to each other. Or wash each other's feet. I think that's happening in our Disciple Bible study. But maybe not many other places.
So maybe it will be like this: that you will sit with one or two others in a circle with a scripture passage and talk about a hard time in your life and tell how that scripture has comforted you on your very worst days. Maybe it will be like this: that you will pray with each other in a small group - not the polite little, sweet little prayers we pray in public before and after meetings with each other, but the desperate, fervent prayers of a person in great pain. Maybe it will be like this: that you will even cry with each other and hold hands together and hug each other. Maybe it will be like this: that you will see the faults in others and acknowledge them and forgive them. Maybe you will even say to another person in this church, very privately: "I know a little bit about your life and I can't imagine how hard it must be, and how can I support you?"
Maybe you will hear Jesus say, "Now that I, your Lord, have washed your feet, you should also wash one another's feet."
Sit with that in silence for a moment.
Comments are closed.
June 2016


text:
Fractional Laser Resurfacing Chat/
Wednesday March 11, 2009.
To join this live fractional laser resurfacing chat, just click this button (at the right time).
Participate in the conversation as Fraxel, Lumenis, MiXto, Juvia, Dot, Lutronic and others (even a PreOwned Laser Dealer) try to convince MAPA Man to purchase their Fractional CO2 Laser. Fractional Erbium and Cutera Pearl Fractional will also be invited.
Wednesday's Chat is going to be about all the Fractional Technology.
- CO2, Glass Erbium, Erbium, Pearl
- How deep, What Percent of Surface Area
- Ablation vs Coagulation
- Dwell Time, Spot Size
We are going to discuss it all! Everyone is Welcome. We will have experts on the Sciton ProFractional, Lumenis UltraPulse, Juvia, Fraxel and others
Discussions include treatment perameters, effectivness, cost, the technolgies and anything else of interest. All interested parties are invited. Reps who identify themselves and are willing to engage in open discusion are also welcome.
To participate: Click the launch window button above at the scheduled time.
Looking forward to seeing you.