text:
ED Magedson – Founder
Ripoff Report
Doxy Lingerie, Doxy Online, Doxy Costume,11088 Millpark Drive, Suite 136 Maryland Heights, Missouri U.S.A.
Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 10/25/2007 08:18 AM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/doxy-lingerie-doxy-online-doxy-costume/maryland-heights-missouri-63043/doxy-lingerie-doxy-online-doxy-costume-no-order-no-response-maryland-heights-missou-280812. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content
Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Doxy Lingerie, Doxy Online, Doxy Costume,
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.


text:
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2
Thread: travelling with PD solutions
June 11, 2011, 10:40 AM #1Unregistered Guest
travelling with PD solutions
Does anyone know if it is safe to travel with PD solutions as checked luggage (ie is the temperature and pressure in the luggage compartment within range). This is in regard to travel from US to Spain.
June 22, 2011, 08:22 AM #2Moderator Registered User
- Join Date
- 08-17-04
- Posts
- 2,147
Sorry that you haven't received an answer for this question. I suspect that a bit of Googling about the temperature extremes in airplane luggage compartments might help you find this out. The airlines are not going to know the safe parameters for storage of PD solution--but they should know how hot or cold the luggage compartment beneath the plane is likely to get.
Not sure why anyone would want to take more than a bag or two of PD solution to Spain though, anyway. PD solution is available around the world. It would make more sense to arrange to pick some up in Spain than to ship water across the world.Executive Director
The Medical Education Institute, Inc.
Similar Threads
donating PD solutionsBy Anonymous in forum PD For PatientsReplies: 7Last Post: October 14, 2011, 05:43 PM
Storing dialysate in car while travelling - risks?By Tim in forum PD For PatientsReplies: 2Last Post: October 11, 2007, 04:02 PM
Viable Solutions & AlternativesBy Anonymous in forum HD For PatientsReplies: 2Last Post: May 1, 2006, 09:28 AM
Where to buy CAPD solutionsBy Gunawan in forum PD For PatientsReplies: 1Last Post: March 14, 2006, 10:59 PM
solutionsBy Anonymous in forum HD For PatientsReplies: 6Last Post: December 1, 2005, 02:20 PM

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Advanced Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 666
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
|Thread Tools
On the first point, I totally agree. However, I'd add that the reason we're a small segment is, until the release of the Ceton, there wasn't really a great way to have a media center PC that could do everything most people wanted. Also, 7MC isn't a well marketed product. I can say honestly, every single person who's ever seen my setup and used it to watch anything has said exactly the same thing "This is awesome, how do I buy this". The demand is there for something like my (and probably your) configuration, it's just that there's no marketing or companies selling systems designed to function like this (telling someone to go to NewEgg and AVS forums.. I might as well tell them to fly to Mars and get a special rock, it's just not going to happen).
Unfortunately, you can't even do it right with two HTPCs. You /have/ to have an extender in order for your recorded TV library to function properly.
I prefer to run an HTPC in each spot, because I have the added flexibility of gaming, XBMC, etc... but where WMC really falls down is in its inability to act as an extender.
From a developer's point of view, we (J. River) would love to support Ceton, but most systems like this are either closed to small developers or require a "membership" payment that is just out of reach. And that may be related to the content owners wanting to keep club membership to a trusted few.
If we were able to partner with Microsoft to do this, we'd probably be back in DRM land, like the middle years of digital music before MP3 was accepted by content owners. We'd also be limited in what we could do with the content. Loading a phone with video wouldn't work with Android, etc.
At least that's my take on the situation. Maybe I'm mistaken.
i saw nothing but the writer's own speculation; there's been no word from microsoft or any manufacturer providing even a remote possibility that softsled is coming.
now for a bit of my own speculation; i don't think you'll see softsled ever, at least not from microsoft as long as the xbox is a supported extender. MS wants you to have an xbox, and they want you to have a live gold account.
i agree it would be an awesome option, but even if available i'd still go with my xbox extenders. its just too simple to give up.
|Thread Tools
|Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


text:
This website uses cookies. For more information please contact us or consult our privacy policy.
Your binder contains too many pages, the maximum is 40.
We are unable to add this page to your binder, please try again later.
This page has been added to your binder.
Asher Hodes is an associate in the corporate group of the firm's San Francisco office. He represents life sciences and technology clients in licensing and collaboration transactions as well as general corporate matters.


text:
We also found out a couple weeks ago what we are having...
Thanks so much for all the kind words and advice during my pregnancy. I so appreciate it and am happy to be sharing this journey with you all!
32 comments
Oh my goodness congrats congrats congrats! LOVE the layered necklaces on the onesie, so appropriate! I am like you, not wanting a certain gender over the other. A healthy baby is the most important. CONGRATS again and what a cute jacket and skinnies too. Too too cute! Congrats! You're glowing!ReplyDelete
Yay! I'm so happy for you (and a girl to boot? she's going to have the best wardrobe ever). Congrats, Tiffany!ReplyDelete
It's crazy how quickly time flies! Your little girl is going to be stylish from the get go ;)ReplyDelete
Haute Child in the City
I had a girls 2 months ago. You'll have so much fun. Although I already can't wait for a boy.ReplyDelete
Memoirs & Mochas
Omg Omg! A giiiiirl! I totally picture you with a little girl, wearing all pink a huge bow on top! Looking so pretty and happy Tiff!ReplyDelete
Cee. ♥
Code Overdressed
Congrats! You look adorable pregnant! love the way you dress your bump!ReplyDelete
Congrats to you!!! I'm sure your sweet baby will be just as cute as you and your husband are. =) How exciting for your family! =)ReplyDelete
You're bump is still so small! You look SO chic :) Congratulations on finding out the gender of your baby - it must be nice to know so that you can prepare everything accordingly.ReplyDelete
congratulations! This is so so wonderful. I cannot wait to see that adorable baby. She will be the best dressed for sure!ReplyDelete
awwww a girl! congrats!!!!!!!! she's gonna be quite the fashionista...i know it! :)ReplyDelete
STOP IT, her first outfits are so YOU - print-mixing and pretty colors already :) Congratulations, this is so very exciting - I can't wait to "meet" her on this blog! Hope the rest of your pregnancy goes smoothly!ReplyDelete
Such a cute pregnant lady... Take lots of outfit pix on your babymoon!ReplyDelete
I haven't had any strong cravings either but at 32 weeks fruit is still my favorite thing to eat. There has to be fruit in the house at all times or it drives me crazy.ReplyDelete
I haven't had any strong cravings either but at 32 weeks fruit is still my favorite thing to eat. There has to be fruit in the house at all times or it drives me crazy.ReplyDelete
How cute are those clothes?! So happy for you! You're the cutest preggo. :)ReplyDelete
Aww lucky you! I always wanted a girl. I hope you have a smooth labour.ReplyDelete
xo Jo
last time I visit your blog, i have this inclination that you are having a girl. Wow ! Your bump does not even look that big and you are 5 months. I know that this baby girl will be super stylish too !ReplyDelete
awwww congrats! Girls are the best, you and your baby are gonna have so much fun together.ReplyDelete
P.S. my baby has the same coat your sister bought in beige...it's the cutest thing ever! She gets complimented on it all the time :D
Yay for the baby girl!! :) she's going to be the best dressed baby ever!ReplyDelete
and OMG that little coat that your sister bought and those jeans are too cute! where are they from???
And 5 months already? You are still so tiny!
Aww, girls are so much fun! I have a girl myself, and tend to go a little overboard when shopping for her. Bring on the frilly dresses, skinny jeans, bows, and polka dots. Congrats!ReplyDelete
aww I am so happy for you :) so many little girls in the blogging world! congratulations!ReplyDelete
Congratulations!!!!!!! Love the pictures!!!! She will most def be a stylish one!ReplyDelete
You are such a beautiful pregnant mama! Congratulations on having a Baby Girl! Shopping for little girls is the best stress buster in the world :)ReplyDelete
Your baby girl is going to have THE BEST closet to shop when she grows up. Lucky kid! Congrats Tiffany! =)ReplyDelete
Congrats! I think I was one of the people that thought you were going to have a little girl from the beginning! The outfits are so cute! Can't wait to see more.ReplyDelete
Aw! Congratulations! So happy for you and your family!ReplyDelete
Can't wait to follow your pregnancy journey :)
Simply Sabrina
You are blessed with a little girl! How exciting!!! Thank you for sharing your journey to motherhood, but maintaining a great balance with your usual fashion posts! I appreciate it!ReplyDelete
I've always found baby clothes so frickin' adorable, and I still do now. But as a mother of a 2.5 year-old raised in Chicago weather up until a year ago and an 8-month old born and now living in Seattle's (nicer) weather, I find that adult clothes shrunk down for babies is EXTREMELY impractical.ReplyDelete
For the sake of outside diaper changing, possible fluctuating weather while outside, and, most importantly, the baby's comfort, BABY SUITS (those one-piece, long-sleeve, pant-length, and hooded suits) are the only thing a baby needs over it's simple onesie while it's out-and-about. I believe they are called PRAMS.
My 2.5 year-old daughter, which we raised in Chicago up until around 1.5 years old, wore a thicker one, a snow suit, up until she could walk. Her starting to walk prompted me to buy more big girl clothes for her (i.e., puffy snow jackets, snow pants, mittens, etc).
My 8-month old was born in August. As a fellow Seattlelite, you know how cold and wet the weather has been since then. His snow suits have been perfect for him as well. The snow suits have provided my kids with no exposed tummies or other extremities to volatile weather. Thanks to them, it's much easier and reassuring for me to have taken my kids out as early as a couple of weeks since their respective births. I don't know about you, but it's sort of tradition for Asians to keep their newborns in the house exclusively until around 3-months. My husband and I lean toward the the "hygiene hypothesis" and "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" approach to parenting. We're both biochemistry majors and my husband, a doctor, so we were always careful when our kids were out in public when they were newborns.
OMG, I'm rambling! lol. Anyway, here are some examples of to which I'm referring. Both my newborns got endless praises from complete strangers about how adorable they are when they were in their snow suits outside.
We found that the ones that have TWO zippers down the front is easiest to put on and take off the babies.
You are one stylish momma, and your baby is going to be equally as stylish!ReplyDelete
Congratulations!!! So exciting, and motherhood is amazing. Little one will be one stylish babe!ReplyDelete
Congratulations! Enjoy every minute of the rest of your pregnancy journey. :) She'll be here before you know it!ReplyDelete
xo Annie


text:
Communication and Second Opinions Save Lives
Hello everyone. I'm excited to be here at Fully Vetted and hope that at least a few of you have stuck around after Dr. Khuly's departure! I've got some big shoes to fill; feel free to let me know how I'm doing.
Did you read the Q & A between Dr. K and me? If so, you might remember that I touched upon the importance of communication between veterinarians and pet owners. Veterinary medicine has become so complex, with so many options at so many price points, that the only way to make sure that pets receive the care they need at a price their owners can afford is … you guessed it, communication.
I had a case recently that really drove this point home for me. I was scheduled for a house call euthanasia appointment on a 4-year-old Red Heeler; I'll call her Annie. Annie had been attacked by two dogs, receiving multiple bite wounds and extensive soft-tissue bruising, just about what you'd expect from a mid-range dog fight. Unfortunately, her owners did not immediately take her to the veterinary office but waited several days until infection had set in and an abscess ruptured. Seeing the pus and blood pooling on the floor was the kick in the pants they needed to finally get her in.
As is usually the case, this crisis occurred after hours, so they took Annie in to a nearby referral/emergency center, and received an estimate of $2,000 to $3,000 for sedation and wound management (to be performed multiple times over the next few days), hospitalization, medications, eventual surgery, etc. The owners explained that they simply didn't have access to this kind of money, and asked if there were any other options. "No," they were told. They applied for a type of credit account that can be used for health emergencies but were declined.
After being told that no other options existed, they decided the best thing they could do for their dog was to euthanize her and called my practice to set up the house call. When I arrived at Annie's house, I was greeted by a tearful owner and a slightly depressed dog who was obviously uncomfortable (she was on Tramadol for her pain) but was certainly not on death's doorstep. I asked Annie's owner if he would be willing to let me sedate her so that I could shave the fur from around her wounds to get a better idea of what we were dealing with (this had not been done at her last vet visit, which made me wonder how the doctors could accurately describe the extent of her injuries). If the damage was overwhelming, we could proceed with euthanasia. If things were not quite as bad as he had been told, maybe I could come up with a Plan B. Annie's owner jumped at the chance to help his dog.
After Annie was sleeping comfortably, I shaved away a lot of fur and found three major punctures that had infections involving deeper tissues, and multiple, less serious scrapes, bruises, etc. After talking it over, her owner and I decided that some "old school" treatment was worth a shot. So I flushed Annie's wounds as best I could while she lay on the garage floor, prescribed a whopping dose of a broad spectrum antibiotic (for the geeks out there, 20 mg/kg amoxicillin-clavulonic acid every eight hours), and crossed my fingers.
Long story short, at her first recheck (three days after the above), Annie was looking much better — infections resolving, wounds starting to heal, and she was a much happier, brighter dog. Still no guarantees, but I'm optimistic that in another week or so, she'll be out of the woods.
Why do I tell you this story? Simply because in all but the most grave cases, options do exist. The Plan B's out there don't always work (I warned Annie's owners that we could spend their money and still have to euthanize), but if you're ever presented with a veterinarian who fails at two-way communication and essentially says, "It's my way or the highway," get a second opinion.
Dr. Jennifer Coates
Image: WilleeCole / via Shutterstock


text:
Eighty-two designers will unveil collections on the capital's catwalks this week, with more than 5,000 visitors expected to attend
Highlights of the event, now in its 30th year, are expected to include Scottish designer Christopher Kane and US red carpet brand Marchesa, which makes its London debut tomorrow.
The Mayor pledged his continued support to British fashion ahead of today's launch event.
He said: "London is developing a reputation as one of the tech capitals of the world but it is already a global leader for fashion. Fashion is utilising the latest technologies to ensure that this important industry continues to generate billions for our economy."
TOP international fashion brands have accounted for half of all central London shop openings so far this year, a study revealed.
New names include Karl Lagerfeld, Swedish trainer label Sneakersnstuff and Canadian fitness brand Lululemon. The study, from property agent Savills, found 12 international retailers new to the UK had opened in London this year, with 11 more due to open by the end of the year.
J.JS Lee London Fashion Week
J.JS Lee London Fashion Week
1/9 The designer incorporated print in her work for the first time
Photo: Alex Lentati
2/9 "Opening London Fashion Week makes me feel I am leading the London Fashion tribe!"
Photo: Anthony Harvey/Getty Images
3/9 The designs included metallic laminated cotton
Photo: Alex Lentati
4/9 The models walk the finale
Photo: Alex Lentati
5/9 The designer mad the most of her new pattern penchant
Photo: Alex Lentati
6/9 The finale closed with a bright lime hue
Photo: Anthony Harvey/Getty Images
7/9 A model sports a lime green dress with a short black collar
Photo: Anthony Harvey/Getty Images
8/9 Asymmetric hemlines were a prominent feature
Photo: Alex Lentati
9/9 The popular print also featured in the form of a trouser suit
Photo: Alex Lentati
British Fashion Council chairwoman Natalie Massenet opened the extravaganza with a promise to make London the world's most tech-savvy capital.
The Net-A-Porter founder praised the digital world for its ability to help British designers build global brands, saying: "Fashion and technology are great partners. We have partnerships with Twitter, Youtube, Facebook and Twitter. London is set."
Massenet added: "When we set out last year, only 33 per cent of designers on the London Fashion Week schedule had e-commerce sites, that has since risen to 43 per cent and we can bring it closer to 100 per cent.
"The British Fashion Council is dedicated to helping all our amazing designers grow their industry."
Fashion Week began with a collection from Seoul-born designer Jackie JS Lee, who ensured proceedings got off to a bright start with a collection punctuated by fresh citrus hues and the introduction of print into her offering for the first time.
A vivid, graphic botanical print — created by scanning pressed irises and daisies and digitally translating them on to silk — appeared throughout.
The designer has form when it comes to modern and innovative fabrics and this season that included metallic laminated cotton which gave a sharp, structured yet translucent fluidity.
Lee, who founded her label J JS Lee in 2011 after graduating from Central Saint Martins, said: "Opening London Fashion Week makes me feel I am leading the London Fashion tribe!"
Tomorrow cutting edge designer J.W. Anderson will showcase his collection., while on Sunday University of Westminster graduate Ashley Williams will show her first official on-schedule collection alongside Paul Smith and Margaret Howell.Reuse content


text:
by Rousas J. Rushdoony
Any discussion of the United Nations is inevitably a religious discussion, for the principles which that organization embodies are not merely political and economic but inescapably religious. As a result, an historical study, however valuable in its own sphere, is inappropriate to our concern. The failures of the U.N. are real and they are many, but it can perhaps be legitimately argued that, as a young institution, it needs time to mature and that its errors are the accidents of youth rather than the diseases of old age. The more basic question is this: Is it established on a solid foundation, or is it built on sand? Is it a boon to humanity, or a menace? It is thus a matter of principles more than of specific incidents and histories.
The religious connotation of the U.N. is apparent in most discussions thereof. Its opponents attack it as anti-Christian and anti-American, and, with no small heat, the proponents of the U.N. defend it as man's great hope for peace and true social order and see its critics as wicked, hate-filled heretics whom they denounce with conspicuous heat and hate.1 It would be the course of wisdom for both sides to recognize that there is no lack of intelligence on both sides, and to concede the earnest faith of both parties, by recognizing that what divides them is not a matter of stupidity and "mental illness" but sharply contrasted articles of faith.
The U.N. thus must be seen in the context of its religious presuppositions. It is, historically, an outgrowth of Enlightenment concepts and of the religion of humanity.2
First of all, the U.N. holds as its basic premise a thesis which has a long history in both religion and in politics, the doctrine of salvation by law. It believes that world peace can be attained through world law.3 In Article I, Section 2 of Chapter I, "Purposes and Principles" of the Charter of the United Nations, it is declared that the purpose is
To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace.4
The Charter makes clear that this purpose, while central, is not the only one. It has, however, received central attention from many proponents. Thus, Eichelberger held in 1955 that "The purpose of the United Nations is the maintenance of peace."5 The problem of the U.N., he held, is political. i.e., methodological, for "The nations can agree upon a foolproof system of disarmament if a political agreement or series of political agreements clears the way."6 "Universal enforceable disarmament with collective security is the final answer to the threat of atomic destruction."7 In other words, remove by force an aspect of man's environment, atomic weapons, and peace will follow. The U.N. needs to be strengthened to this end, he held. "The United Nations is in the shadowy area between an organization of states and a world government."8 In 1960, Eichelberger reaffirmed his stand: "The purpose of the United Nations is to prevent war."9 Its purpose, moreover, is to establish an international society for this purpose:
The fundamental question could be stated in another way: is the United Nations the foundation of international policy or an instrument which nations can use or reject as short-sighted self-interest dictates?
An examination of the Charter's Preamble, purposes and principles leads to the inescapable conclusion that the framers of the United Nations contemplated a dynamic international society. The world was at war. The peoples of many nations were serving together and making terrible sacrifices to win the war. They believed that with peace would come an international society strong enough to prevent war and build a just international order. The Atlantic Charter expressed this belief.10
The responsibilities of this international society must be "Planet Earth as a whole. And Planet Earth must be a moral and legal entity."11
This first premise, salvation by law, is a venerable one, with extensive religious support. It is, clearly, the basic doctrine of Judaism, and it is extensively present in traditional Christianity as in Thomism and Arminianism. It is the dominant doctrine of modernistic, social gospel Protestantism. Two aspects of this premise have already become manifest: First, that the hope and salvation of man and of society is through world law, and, second, that the essence or at least the primary factor in peace is environmental rather than personal. The environment must be altered by the removal of atomic weapons and by the addition of enforceable world law. This is a faith which many hold who are politically and economically conservative, as witness Senator Barry M. Goldwater, who holds that the U.N. needs re-direction, not abolition. The same is true of Felix Morley.12 This position, however, cannot be consistently held by one who is a conservative or orthodox Christian because of its radical conflict with basic biblical doctrine. For the orthodox Christian, the law cannot save; it can only condemn. The law cannot create true peace and order; it cannot save man and society from the consequences of their sins. Christ alone is the prince and principle of peace and of order, man's only savior and mediator. Neither introduction of law nor the removal of a part of man's environment are basic to the problem of peace, but rather regeneration through the saving work of Christ, His vicarious sacrifice, and sanctification in and through Him. Wars are not environmental in sources and origin but human. "From whence come wars and fightings among you? Come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?" (James 4:1). Thus war is caused by sin, not by environment. Moreover, not all who are involved in war are equally sinners. Some are unjustly attacked and must defend themselves, so that peace as such is not always a virtue and can be as evil as any war. More accurately, war in itself cannot be called evil, for sin resides in man himself rather than in things, so that to seek the abolition of war is to evade the basic issue, the sin of man. And man's need is regeneration, which is not the function of the state. For the state to presume to save man is for the state to assume the prerogatives of the church. The Preamble to the Charter of the United Nations declares in part, "We the peoples of the United Nations determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war... to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest... have resolved to combine our efforts to accomplish these aims." The U.N. is thus "determined to save"; it is thus possessed with all the sense of inevitability and missionary fervor that any religious group possesses. It deserves to be regarded as a crusading missionary organization and to be respected for its idealistic faith, but, at the same time, regarded by orthodox Christians as a false and deadly faith, all the more deceptive because its idealism is premised on an anti-Christian faith. Inescapably, the hostility between the U.N., with its doctrine of the salvation of man and society by law, and orthodox Christianity is no less intense and bitter now than when the Sanhedrin felt that the future of the people and of their Temple required the death of Jesus (John 11:49-52).
A second basic premise of the U.N. is closely related to the first. Believing as it does in world peace through world law, it assumes that this world rule of law is necessarily the rule of morality. This illusion has been clearly expressed by Dean Roscoe Pound: "The real foe of absolution is law."13 Yet the "courts are creatures of the political community," one advocate of this position affirms.14 Is absolutism then really the enemy of law? Is not all positivistic law dedicated to absolutism? If no higher law is recognized, and if law is what man says it is, is not either the law or man absolutized, and, in either case, the controlling powers invested with total power? John Foster Dulles, in championing the U.N., clearly affirmed this same equation of "agreed law" and morality:
It is generally agreed that a stable world order depends most of all upon the existence of an adequate body of international law which can be administered so as to secure justice. There is no such body of law today. Without it certain other steps cannot be taken. It is not safe to give coercive power to the Security Council or to any other international body unless that body is bound to administer agreed law. Without law, power is despotism. We ought not to try to impose international despotism upon others; neither should we consent to have it imposed upon ourselves.15
But the U.S.S.R. is both a despotism and has an agreed law. It is moreover democratic in structure. According to the Chairman of the U.S.S.R. Supreme Court:
In the USSR justice is administered only by the courts, and all citizens are equal before the law and the court., irrespective of social or property status, office, nationality, race or religion.
All courts in the USSR are elective. Every citizen of the USSR who enjoys the right of suffrage is eligible for election as judge or people's assessor. There is no property or other qualification; all that is required is that the candidate shall have attained the age of 25.16
The Soviet Constitution affirms the rule of law, of Soviet law, from whence comes all true power and law. As Article 3 affirms, "All power in the U.S.S.R. belongs to the working people of town and country as represented by the Soviets of Working People's Deputies."17 Why not then accept the U.S.S.R. as an area of freedom, because ruled by law, rather than a despotism? And yet even Socialists have been ready to apply such terms as "lynch procedure" to Soviet law.18 What would constitute "agreed law" for Dulles? Soviet scholars believe their society to be more truly concerned with the individual and with true humanism than "anti-humanist . . . monopoly capitalism."19 Dulles, as an earnest and even sanctimonious champion of modernist Christianity, had much to say about the righteous foundations of peace.20 Dulles defined the basis of law:
Fundamentally, world peace depends upon world law, and world law depends upon a consensus of world opinion as to what is right and what is just. If there is wide disagreement about what is right and just, there will always be risk of war. Human nature is such that men always have believed — and I trust always will believe — as President Wilson put it in his war message to Congress, "The right is more precious than peace."
Experience in the United Nations shows that there is considerable agreement about what is right. That is particularly true between those who are influenced by one or another of the great religions· All the great religions reflect to some degree the moral or natural law, and that makes it possible to find many common denominators of right and wrong.
The great difficulty today is that the Communist rulers, who control so much of the world, are animated by an atheistic creed which denies the existence of a moral law or a natural law. To them, laws do not reflect justice, but are ways whereby those in power win their class war. For their beliefs and ours, it is impossible to find a common denominator. They do, however, pay attention to other people's sense of right and justice, because that affects what they will do and how they will act in any given situation. That is always of interest, even to despots.21
Three points are here apparent. First, Dulles, holding that "world peace depends upon world law," grounds that world law on no more than "a consensus of world opinion as to what is right and what is just." This consensus includes what the great religions have to say, and, if there be "wide disagreement," then "there will always be a risk of war." Dulles' foundation is thus purely immanent, a consensus or general will, and, because agreement is so important, it is logical to urge the world religions to suppress their differences or at the least to make them unessential to their position Second, Dulles made the very questionable assumption that all "great religions" are extensively agreed "about what is right." Orthodox Christianity would not accept this assumption. Third, Dulles held that, because Communism is atheistic, "it is impossible to find a common denominator" with respect to "a moral law or a natural law." One would logically assume that Dulles felt that the Communist states and all atheistic states have no place in the U.N. This, however, was not the ease. In fact, Dulles in 1950 called for the recognition of Red China as a necessity if that government retained power "over a reasonable period of time."22 How was this rationalized, when no moral common denominator exists, according to Dulles? There is another common denominator, power:
At the present stage of world development we should try to evolve a world organization that will form moral judgments and reflect as adequately as possible the quantity, quality, and intensity of power which will back these judgments.
. . . Some persons would like to throw out Soviet Russia because we disagree with their representatives and they with us. A world organization without Soviet Communists would be a much more pleasant organization. But they have power in the world, and if the United Nations gets away from that reality it becomes artificial and exerts less influence. The United Nations should mirror more accurately, not less accurately, the reality of what is.23
The world must be saved by law, and law reflects power rather than morality. Indeed, the United Nations must be beyond good and evil:
I have now come to believe that the United Nations will best serve the cause of peace if its Assembly is representative of what the world actually is, and not merely representative of the parts which we like. Therefore, we ought to be willing that all the nations should be members without attempting to appraise closely those which are "good" and those which are "bad." Already that distinction is obliterated by the present membership of the United Nations.24
How can Dulles affirm the primacy of world law based "upon what is right and just" and then deny the validity, in that world order, of any appraisal of "good" and "bad" nations? The answer may lie in his central moral conviction:
Our greatest need is to regain confidence in our spiritual heritage. Religious belief in the moral nature and possibilities of man is, and must be, relevant to every kind of society, throughout the ages past and those to come. It is relevant to the complex conditions of modern society. We need to see that, if we are to combat successfully the methods and practices of a materialistic belief.25
Orthodox Christianity affirms as the "greatest need," intellectually, the true recognition of the nature of Christ and of his saving power. The religion of humanity, which Dulles affirmed, found the nature of Christ irrelevant or at best a peripheral issue to "religious belief in the moral nature and possibilities of man." But for orthodox Christianity, man is a sinner, not the object of faith. Dulles felt it was a triumph of the U.N. that religious differences are regarded as irrelevant: "They mingle together on a basis of social and intellectual equality, irrespective of nation, race, sex, or creed." This, he held, was "genuine fellowship,"' practiced at the U.N. "more than anywhere else."26 But for an orthodox Christian, who denies the equality of all creeds, this fellowship is anathema. All of these assumptions by the U.N., Dulles, and others, adds up to a simple equation: the rule of law is the rule of morality, which is faith in man. And this, in its own way, is a faith which Marxism emphatically holds. The world problem again appears, in this focus, not as a need for regeneration but for re-organization, not a change in man's nature but a change in ,man's legal and institutional environment. And this, of course was the Enlightenment hope.27
The goal of the U.N. is thus a humanistic order rather than a moral order in the sense of a transcendental law and the categories of good and evil. Humanism itself is equated with morality, and no other category can have any relevance. The Preamble makes clear that its allegiance is to "fundamental human rights," not to fundamental moral or religious rights or principles. The charter in stating its "Purposes and Principles," speaks clearly and plainly on this matter, affirming as a purpose and principle of the U.N.
To achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.28
It is moreover stated that "The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all Members."29 This is at least an unrealistic statement in view of the veto power granted to certain members. Again it is stated that the United Nations shall promote:
a. higher standards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and social progress and development;
b. solutions of international economic, social, health, and related problems; and international cultural and educational cooperation; and
c. universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.30
A third premise of the U.N. is thus clearly in view: it is a humanistic order, equalitarian and socialistic as well as totalitarian. It is denied that economics or religion are separate law spheres; both are subordinate to politics, to world politics, which must govern to secure "conditions of economic and social progress and development." Religious differences are denied any validity, for no distinction as to religion is permitted. Not the freedom of economic law and religious activity but world legislation with respect to both is in view. Here is a position radically at odds with historic, orthodox Christianity. It is at odds also with the constitutional heritage of the United States. It is in power today, however, in both the U.N. and the United States. William O. Douglas, a U.S. Supreme Court Justice, has declared, "We believe that the extinction of any civilization, culture, religion, or life-ways is a loss to all humanity."31 This of course immediately renders guilty every universal religion, i.e., every faith which believes that it is the hope of every man's salvation, because every such faith seeks to destroy by conversion every false faith. It renders guilty every American who longs for and works for the destruction of Communism. It is a demand for total tolerance because of total acceptance. Faith is in humanity as such, not in a transcendental moral and spiritual order. It is not "In God We Trust," but "In Man We Trust." According to Douglas, "As Mr. Justice Holmes once said, 'Universal distrust creates universal incompetence.'"32 The biblical mandate, "Cease ye from man, whose breath is in his nostrils: for wherein is he to be accounted of?" (Isa. 2:22) and " . . . beware of men" (Matt. 10:17), is set aside, not on any empirical grounds of evidence, but on religious grounds. This strange new doctrine we are now told is the truly Christian and the truly American doctrine! Harry Dexter White, in his testimony before the House Un-American Activities Committee on August 13, 1948, affirmed this faith and said, in part, "My creed is the American creed ... I am opposed to discrimination in any form, whether on grounds of race, color, religious, political belief, or economic status."33 According to this position, there can logically be no discrimination against religious polygamy or cannibalism, or against communism. V. Frank Coe, on the stand on May 15, 1956, objected to being questioned as to his alleged Communist allegiance during a stated period, stating "that he should not be questioned about his political beliefs."34 The logic of this is that there can be no challenge to what the humanistic world powers declare to be the status quo. As Lenny Bruce has stated it, "The religious leaders are 'what should be' . . . Let me tell you the truth. The truth is 'what is.' If 'what is' is, you have to sleep eight, ten hours a day, that is the truth. A lie will be: People need no sleep at all. Truth is 'what is.'"35 Everything that exists, perversions, murders, and the like stands at least on an equality with good character as truth. Whatever this humanistic world order therefore declares to be "what is" is therefore "the truth." But it is a violation of orthodox Christian faith to see the state as the order of truth, which the Charter of the U.N. makes it to be. We need not go to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in which Mrs. Franklin D. Roosevelt had a major part, to substantiate this. The Charter itself makes clear that this universal equalitarianism is the true faith for all mankind. It is, moreover, an absolute order, binding on all mankind. "In the United Nations, as 'in my Father's house,' there 'are many mansions.'"36 What does this mean? The Charter is explicit, as Cohen points out:
The Charter of the United Nations is a treaty, but not an ordinary treaty. The Member States which subscribe to the Charter not only commit themselves to act in pursuance of the purposes and in conformity with the principles of the Charter, but authorize the Organization to ensure that non-Member as well as Member States act in accordance with the principles of the Charter, so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security. The Charter looks toward, if it does not establish, a world-wide community of nations dedicated to the purposes and principles of the Charter.37
Lest it be assumed that this is merely Cohen's personal opinion, let us examine the Charter at this point:
The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.38
As a result, any act or agency of the U.N. which that body declares to be in accordance with its principles, such as UNESCO or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted near midnight, December 10, 1948, when the General Assembly met in Paris), is enforceable by armed force on any member or non-member state. That the U.N. intends to exert such force whenever and wherever it is able to do so can be safely assumed. In the meantime, certainly the constituent states are not lacking in politicians who are dedicated to "peaceful coexistence" as "a first step" towards "a staging area from which further advances toward the ideal global order can be launched."39 To gain this peaceful coexistence, "The building of greater confidence and trust thus becomes a first objective of peaceful coexistence."40 Again, faith in man is a basic perspective. Certainly the U.S. has dedicated itself to an attempt, no less zealously than the U.S.S.R., to create a world order and world peace.
This is in evidence in the State Department, as in the U.N., and also in NATO, which is defined as "not merely a military alliance . . . it equally envisages permanent common action in the political and economic fields."41
These human rights which are to be imposed on all societies are basically hostile to every society. There is no country without a religious and racial orientation. In the U.S.S.R., the old Christian faith maintains its vitality underground. Each Soviet Republic is outwardly governed by men of its own racial origin. Thus, "in the Lithuanian Republic 90.6% of the judges are Lithuanians, and in the Armenian SSR 95% are Armenian.42 Indeed, charges of anti-Semitism are leveled against the U.S.S.R., Jacobson charging that a high percentage of criminal executions involve Jews.43 Others, like Bishop James A. Pike, have stated the reverse, namely, that the "Russians extend the melting pot idea to the point of persecution. In Russia, they say one can't be different. They say, 'We won't allow you to have cultural and religious separateness."'44 Whether either position is accurate is at least a matter of debate and probably questionable. Nonetheless, it can be safely said that it is likely that some race or races are the object of prejudice and discrimination in the U.S.S.R., and all historic religions as well. Certainly India discriminates against races and faiths alien to itself, as does Israel, Yemen, Ghana, and virtually every state in existence. Each properly represents the order of a particular people and a general or specific faith. The U.N. Charter gives grounds for the interference of that body into every national and religious state in existence in the name of total equality.
The U.N. position, ostensibly anti-racist, is no less racist than the most fervent champions of race in history. Indeed, the liberal, religion of humanity, faith is simply a form of racism. There are two kinds of racism today. For the first, to belong to a particular race, white or black, Jewish or Arab, is all-important. Membership in a particular group is itself the mark of distinction and discrimination, and constitutes the dividing line. For the second form of racism, to belong to the human race is all-important. For both positions, racial membership is the test, the ticket of admission and the guarantee of status. Against this expanded or liberal form of racism, as against all forms of racism, orthodox Christianity enters a dissent. For the Christian, character, born of faith, is the test of man, not a particular race or the human race. Racial differences are recognized as real and as God-given, but the determinative fact concerning man is his relationship to God, not his fact of humanity. This is the biblical position; it is also the position which makes for progress by emphasizing quality. Quality is sought out and emulated. A people, discriminated against at one time, by emulation advance themselves, as witness the Irish in America. Therefore, in no uncertain terms, the orthodox Christian must regard the universal racism of the U.N. as a menace, destructive of the faith and detrimental to man.
The humanism of the U.N., as has been already indicated, rests on a religious doctrine of man, the fourth premise of its position. Because man must be trusted, and, because humanity as such is its standard apart from all distinctions of race or creed, idealism is held to be workable. All men, insofar as they are divorced from the alienating faiths of nationalism and supernatural religion, are assumed to seek peace and to desire it. Man is good, except when perverted by limited allegiances of country and faith. But idealism is one of the worst enemies of orthodox Christianity, in that it denies the doctrine of original sin and asserts that man's works and law can overcome the effects of sin and sin itself. It assumes that men's motives are good: they seek peace and progress when not perverted by outside influences. But orthodox Christianity says that men seek rather death and destruction apart from Christ. "All they that hate me love death" (Prov. 8:36). The idealism of unregenerate man is self-defeating and self-deceiving.
But the presupposition that man can save himself and his society by his own works and law rests not only on the assumption that man's basic problems are environmental rather than ethical and religious, i.e., due to a fallen nature, but also on the assumption that all human differences are of degree only, and not of kind. Hence they can be remedied or reconciled by man. Man must therefore seek relief, not from God but from himself magnified into the form of a world state. Orthodox Christianity, by its insistence on the sovereignty of God in salvation as in all things, cannot give assent to this faith.
But, in this perspective of the religion of humanity as incarnated in the U.N., the human problem is one of proper management and direction rather than a change of nature. What man needs thus is not the divine act but human engineering and planning.
By its failure to reckon with the fact of sin as the reality of human nature rather than an accident of environment and training, the U.N. is not only incompetent to deal with sin but especially prone to it. No legislative body is immune from the fact of sin. Every kind of institution, civil, religious, educational or otherwise, with any history of any length, has been characterized at some time or other, sometimes and often chronically, by corrupt practices, including graft and bribery. But in those bodies where a strong and active Christian faith prevails, that faith conditions and governs the limits of corruption, although it does not expect perfection this side of heaven. In the U.N., lacking in Christian faith and subscribing to an idealistic humanism, there is no such limitation. The voting is almost strictly in terms of the most corrupt kind of power politics and bribery.45
By failing to reckon with the fact of sin, the U.N. falls into the same fallacy as Marxism, that of seeing the backward peoples not simply as backward because of false faith and bad character but as victimized. The consequences of this position are favoritism for the backward and the delinquent (as well as the criminal), and the penalizing of the advanced. "Burden-sharing" is imposed on the advanced in the form of extensive grants in aid to other nations.46 These nations are not termed backward or degenerate but rather "the less developed members."47 Progress is seen as an accident of environment and opportunity, not as a consequence of religious character.
It is possible to cite at length the political consequences of the false premises of the U.N. A few will suffice. The Charter provides for centralization of power and vastly expands the powers of state. Its officials are appointed. Property rights and trial by jury are omitted from the Charter. The U.S. Constitution, on the other hand, both separates and limits the powers and the branches of the federal government. It provides for elected officials, protects property rights, and protects the right of trial by jury. The Constitution denies to the federal union any jurisdiction over religion; the Charter forbids all religious distinctions, which is tantamount to abolishing all religions save the religion of humanity. Established to keep the peace, it has failed to keep the peace.48 While talking much of human rights, as in The Covenant on Human Rights, its "every statement of right places in government hands unlimited authority to define the right and to restrict every exercise of it."49 It has been consistently a threat to historic liberties.50 The U.N. has been characterized in its brief history by one sorry scandal after another, and one failure after another: the Bang-Jensen case, Hungary, Tibet, Palestine, Goa, the Congo, Angola, and many, many more.51
The U.N. believes in salvation by law, but in no historic sense does it have law. The two central definitions of law are (1) the binding custom or practice of a community, or (2) the commandments or revelations of God. The U.N. has no community of law, nor any revealed religious basis. As a result, its decisions, as well as those of the World Court, are bound to be an injustice to most men. Law, however, can also be the rule of conduct and action prescribed by a supreme governing authority and enforced thereby. Such law from early times has been called tyranny. The laws of the U.N. thus, however well-intentioned, and the decisions of the World Court, however much informed by a zeal for humanity, are inescapably a tyranny to most men. To impose the laws of Islam upon a Jain and a Christian is surely tyranny, even as would be the imposition of Jewish law upon a Moslem. Law can be as much an instrument of invasion and tyranny as can bayonets; alien laws strike at the heart of a culture and at its vitals. In the name of defending all cultures, the U.N. is a new humanistic culture aimed at destroying all others by means of the imperialism of world law and a world police. It is not surprising that the U.N. is unpopular with many, and this distaste for the U.N. is no doubt a factor among others in the financial delinquency of many members with respect to dues. The U.S. is paying "nearly half of the U.N. peacekeeping operations," among other things.52
While weak in many areas, the U.N. is clearly strong in the support it gains from certain religious circles, especially where the religion of humanity is clearly in view. During World War I, the European World Conscience Society distributed to the clergy in the English-speaking world a book dedicated to affirming "the spiritual unity of man" as a scientific fact, "Proclaiming his social unity," and "preaching the gospel of political unity."53 The oneness of all races, religions, and states was the new gospel of this agency.
During World War II, the joint operation of all religions to create the new world order was urged through a Federal Council of Churches Commission. Everett R. Clinchy urged, "Let Protestants, Catholics and Jews and those of other religious faith live to prove that men can together build the natural world without and the intellectuals and moral world within so that the united peoples of the world shall create a prosperity, as Lincoln suggested, whose course shall be forward and which as long as the earth endures shall never pass away.54
The National Council of Churches has repeatedly called for support of the U.N. In its 1963 Philadelphia Assembly message, after calling for "racial brotherhood and justice," the "National Council's Message to the Churches" went on to say, in terminology common to the religion of humanity:
As churches, we must actively support the United Nations and adequate aid for developing nations; must press for significant steps toward disarmament and for diversion of enormous resources now devoted to the arms race to a frontal attack on the unmet needs of mankind;
and must recognize that revolutionary movements of our time may be new thrusts for human dignity and freedom.55
These general terms could serve to give dignity to any revolutionary movement, for which do not claim to seek "human dignity and freedom?"
On April 10, 1963, Pope John XXIII addressed an encyclical, "Pacem in Terris," to the Roman Catholic Church and "to all men of good will," calling for a world community without Christian faith as its premise.56 Although some churchmen sought to give the encyclical a conservative perspective, others, like Father Joseph Walsh, C.S.P., saw in it radical directions:
I personally never thought I would see the day when a Pope would talk about the human family having entered upon an advance towards limitless horizons — this, from the successor of a Pope who, a hundred years ago, was condemning liberalism with its claims of man's capacity to grow and perfect himself as somehow opposed to the innate limitations of humanity. This change is of great significance for the way in which Catholicism and Catholics in general will view the future and the problems of mankind. Man is now looked upon as capable of advancing towards limitless horizons. The Pope very much wants to immerse his institution in that advance.57
Some men have openly called for a world religion, or a United Religions order comparable to the United Nations. Thus, Dr. Luther H. Evans, Dartmouth College professor of political science and ex-director general of UNESCO has said, "The peace of the world demands not only the existence of the United Nations, but also a United Religions."58 But "conflict, not peace will be the consequence of pressures for religious unity."59
The religious tension and conflict between orthodox Christianity and the religion of humanity, to mention no others, cannot be reconciled. Orthodox Christianity sees the problem of man as "a disruption between man and God ... the troubles man has are due to a broken relationship with his Maker." The religion of humanity points instead "to the disruption within human personality. It is said that ideally man is a 'whole' person and that breakdowns in this wholeness cause the troubles man experiences." Here the basic problem is not "a disruption between man and God" but "the basic problem is rather a disruption within — and between man and man" requiring, among other things, the restoration of "the dimensions of brotherhood."60 Dr. Franklin Littell has stated the aim of the faith is "the renewal of the social structure...not the saving of individual souls," for "God wants to restore responsibility to a rebellious and broken social order."61
This is a revolutionary, messianic, and anti-historical religious faith, for its goal is the end of history in the perfect social order. As one man has stated it, "The realm of childhood is, by nature, a real democracy. Children do not know the past; they live in the present; they have no anguish of the future."62 Not only must all men and all religions be equal, but apparently all times and ages as well!
Certainly, this faith offers an easy equalization of all standards. When the Rev. Adam Clayton Powell, Negro Congressman and civil rights leader, was criticized for his moral conduct, his answer was forthright and rigorously honest. "I know what they're saying, 'You should be better than other people because you might embarrass the civil rights struggle.' Why should I be better than other people? Hell, man, I'm fighting for equality!"63
A one world order requires a one world religion in order to be undergirded by a living fabric of faith and law. The issue will be joined, accordingly, in the arena of Christian faith rather than in political action, for the dynamics of action are in the realm of faith. For the one world order to advance, it must wage war against religion, orthodox Christianity in particular. There is thus no escaping the fact of religious warfare. Those who refuse to offer incense to the new caesars will face both hostility and persecution. But even more certainly, they will have from their faith the assurance of victory (I John 5:4,5).
1See Gordon H. Hall: The Hate Campaign Against the U.N., One World Under Attack. Boston: Beacon Press, 1952.
2See R. J. Rushdoony, This Independent Republic. Nutley, N.J.: Craig Press, 1964.
3See Grenville Clark and Louis B. Sohn: World Peace Through World Law. Cambridge: Harvard, 1958.
4For a commentary on this, see Hans Kelsen: The Law of the United Nations, A Critical Analysis of its Fundamental Problems, pp. 27 ff. New York: Praeger, 1950.
5Clark M. Eichelberger: U.N.: The First Ten Years, p. 8. New York: Harper, 1955.
6Ibid., p. 51.
7Ibid., p. 52.
8Ibid., p. 89.
9Clark M. Eichelberger: U.N.: The First Fifteen Years, p- 8: cf. p. 4.
10lbid., p. 125.
11Ibid., p. 147.
12Barry M. Goldwater: Why Not Victory? p. 99 f. New York: Macfadden, 1962. Felix Morley wrote, "On the whole, the Charter is workmanlike and will be workable, if resolute popular will to that end is manifest in this and other countries": The Charter of the United Nations, An Analysis, p. 55. New York: American Enterprise Association, January, 1946.
13Roscoe Pound: Justice According to Law, pp. 87-91; New Haven: Yale, 1951, cited in Victor G. Rosenblum: Law as a Political Instrument, p. 81; New York: Random House, 1962.
14Rosenblum, idem. Raymond Swing equated the U.N. developed into world government, as law and national sovereignty as lawlessness and anarchy, Raymond Swing: In the Name of Sanity, p. 116; New York: Harper, 1946.
15John Foster Dulles: War or Peace, p. 198. New York: Macmillan, 1950. On Dulles, see James J. Martin: Meditations Upon the Early Wisdom of John Foster Dulles; Mercer Island, Washington, 1958.
16Alexander Gorkin, "Guilty or Not Guilty — Who Decides?" in USSR Soviet Life Today, p. 17, December, 1963.
17Robert Le Fevre: Constitutional Government Today in Soviet Russia, The Constitution of the U.S.S.R. Annotated and explained, p. 19. New York: Exposition, 1962.
18Julius Jacobson, "Russian Law Enters the 'Final Stages of Communism' — 1," in New Politics p. 19-42, Fall, 1963, vol. II. no. 4.
19"See Y. A. Zamoshkin, "Bureaucracy and the Individual," The Soviet Review, August, 1961, vol. 2, no. 8, pp. 20-38 and Nikolai Gei and Vladimir Piskunov, "Abstract Humanism and Socialist Humanism," The Soviet Review, June, 1961, vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 39-55.
20See John Foster Dulles, "The American People Need Now to be Imbued with a Righteous Faith," in Dulles, etc.: A Righteous Faith for a Just and Durable Peace, pp. 5-11. New York: Commission to Study the Bases of a Just and Durable Peace, Federal Council of Churches, 1942. For Dulles' piety, see Margaret Dulles Edwards, "Tomorrow's Legacy," Bible Society Record, vol.' 109, no. 1 January, 1964. p. 12 f.
21Dulles: War or Peace, p. 187.
22Ibid., p. 190.
23Ibid., p. 188.
24Ibid., p. 190. Alexander Dallin concurs with this opinion in The Soviet Union at the United Nations, An Inquiry into Soviet Motives and Objectives, p. 212 f.; New York: Praeger, p. 213. Soviet hopes from the U.N. are cited by Dallin, p. 192.
25Ibid., p. 261.
26bid., p. 65. While talking of equality, the U.N. is the most elitist of organizations. The General Assembly has no power but can only recommend action. The Security Council is vested with the actual power, while the Court executes its legal will. The Security Council can order against any country such measures as it deems including war, or total blockade, or "complete or partial interruption o£ economic relations, and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio and other means of communication" Charter, chapt. VII, articles 41, 42.
Dulles affirmed his belief in man. It is well remember who the politicians are who have most often spoken of the need for such faith. Thus, it was Senator John C. Spooner, who, at the beginning of the 20th century, defended himself and other corrupt politicians, saying, "There is no treason in the Senate! The one man I despise most is he who takes upon his lips in blasphemy the good character of a woman; next to that is the man who will tear down the character of the man in public life. Above all things, my brothers, believe in your republic and in the general fidelity of your public servants." Faith in man is the constant plea of corrupt men. David Graham Phillips: The Treason of the Senate, p. 51. Stanford: Academic Reprints (1906 in original Cosmopolitan publication).
27See Louis I. Bredvold: The Brave New World of the Enlightenment. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1961.
28Charter of the United Nations. Chapt. I, Article 1, Sect. 3.
29Charter, I, 2, 1.
30Charter IX, 55.
31William O. Douglas: Democracy's Manifesto, p. 44. Garden
City, New York: Doubleday, 1962.
32Ibid., p. 28.
33Nathan I White: Harry Dexter White, Loyal American, p. 11 f.; of. 22 f.; 41 f. published by Bessie (White) Bloom, Waban, Mass., 1956. White's "creed" is becoming U.S. Supreme Court law. Thus, in 1952, (343 U.S. 250) in Beauharnais v. Illinois, the Court "sanctioned state antihate legislation which imposed criminal sanctions on persons guilty of publishing statements which exposed the citizens of any race color, creed, or religion to contempt, derision, or obloquy." Paul G. Kauper: Civil Liberties and the Constitution, p. 58; Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1962. Subsequently, the Illinois FEPC ruled that the Motorola Co. stop using ability tests for job applicants on the ground that the test was discriminatory and unfair in failing to make allowance for "culturally deprived and disadvantaged groups" and for "inequalities and differences in environment." See Human Events, vol. XXIV, no. 14, April 4, 1964, pp. 4, 13. In other words, the incompetent must be made privileged, and the competent penalized to equalize men in the name of democracy.
34Ibid., p. 408.
35Lenny Bruce, "How to talk dirty and influence people," Playboy, vol. 11 no. 1 January 1964, p. 182.
36Benjamin V. Cohen: The United Nations, Constitutional Developments, Growths, and Possibilities, p. 101. The Oliver Wendell Holmes Lectures, 1961. Cambridge: Harvard, 1961.
37Ibid., p. 2 f.
38Charter, I, 6. See also Eichelberger: U.N.: The First Fifteen Years, pp. 106-8; Kelsen, p. 75 f.
39Arthur N. Holcombe, chairman: Peaceful Coexistence, A New Challenge to the United Nations, p. 37. Twelfth Report, Commission to Study the Organization of Peace, Research Affiliate of the American Association for the United Nations New York: 1960.
40Ibid., p. 19.
41North Atlantic Treaty Organization Information Service: The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, p. 7 f.; cf. p. 52. The NATO Handbook. Paris, 1962. See also John Fischer: Master Plan U.S.A., An Informal Report on America's Foreign Policy and the Men Who Make It; New York: Harper. 1951; Nelson A. Rockefeller: The Future of Federalism New York: Atheneum, 1963; see the Department of State Foreign Policy Briefs for numerous instances; see President Lyndon B. Johnson's State of Union Message of January 8, 1964, S. F. Examiner, Thursday, January 9, 1964 p. 14
42Gorkin, idem.
43Jacobson, p. 34 ff.
44S. F. Examiner, Tuesday, January 7, 1964, p. 9.
45For one instance, see Alfred Lilientahal: What Price Israel?, pp. 61 ff., with reference to Palestine; Chicago: Regnery, 1953. This, however, is merely one case among many.
46See Pierre Uri: Partnership for Progress, A Program for Transatlantic Actions, p. 45. Published for the Atlantic Institute by Harper and Row, New York, 1963.
47Eichelberger: The U.N.: The First Fifteen Years. p. 130 f.
48See "There is No Peace — 18 Years 57 Wars," The Indianapolis News, Monday, April 29, 1963.
49V. Orval Watts: Should We Strengthen the United Nations? p. 29, Colorado Springs: The Freedom School, 1961.
50Alice Widener: Behind the U.N. Front. New York: Bookmailer, 1962. Widener has an interesting chapter on the U.N. advocate, Clark M. Eichelberger pp. 87-94.
51See U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary: The Bang-Jensen Case, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1961: Julius Epstein: "The Bang-Jensen Tragedy," American Opinion, vol. III, no. 5, May, 1960; Congo July 1960 Evidence. Statement by Mr. Merchiers, Belgian Minister of Justice; 46 Angry Men, The 46 Civilian Doctors of Elisa-bethville Denounce U.N.O. Violations in Katanga, Belmont, Mass., 1962; On the Morning of March 15, Boston: Portuguese-American Committee on Foreign Affairs, n.d.; On the double role of Lt. General Vasiliev, with the U.N. and with the North Korean invasion. in the Korean War, see U.S. Department of Defense, Office of Public Information, release no. 465-54, Saturday, May 15, 1954; Michel Sturdza: World Government and Internal Assassination, Belmont, Mass., 1963, p. 18, cites Professor Hans Morgenthau of Chicago as stating that "The International Government of the United Nation, stripped of its legal trimmings, then, is really the International Government of the United States and the Soviet Union acting in unison;" the citation is from Hans J. Morgenthau, "The New United Nations, What It Can't and Can Do." Commentary, November 1958, vol. 26, no. 5, p. 376. Morgenthau, who favors the U.N., points out that the U.N.'s legal power is in the Security Council, which has "only two . . . really great powers," the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. When these two work in unison, they are the U.N.; "if they are disunited — there will be no international government at all." One can conclude, therefore, from the activities of the U. N. that there is a growing range of action in unison.
52Oakland (Calif.) Tribune, "Showdown in the U.N." editorial, p. 23 Wednesday, January 8, 1964.
53Walter Walsh: The World Rebuilt, p. 27. London: Allen and Unwin, 1917.
54Everett R. Clinchy, "Christians Must Seek the Cooperation of Other Faiths" in Dulles, etc.: A Righteous Faith, p. 36. f. On the National Council, see The Dan Smoot Report, vol. 10, no. 2, January 13, 1964, "National Council of Churches."
55"National Council's Message to the Churches," Presbyterian Life, vol. 17, no. 1, January 1, 1964, p. 26.
56The New York Times, Western Edition, Thursday. April 11, 1963, pp. 1, 5-7, Arnoldo Cortesi, "Pope Urges Formulation of World Nation to Insure Peace and the Rights of man."
57"Pacem in Tetris: an unexpected ally," interview with Father Joseph Walsh, in new university thought, Summer, 1963, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 17. For a contrary opinion of the encyclical, from a conservative, see Sister M. Margaret Patricia, "Justice Has Sprung From The Earth," 1963.
58Hector Pereyra-Suarez, "Blueprint for Religious Union," in Liberty, September-October, 1963, vol. 58, no. 5, p. 8.
59Ibid., p. 11, the concluding comment of Hector Pereyra-Suarez.
60Editorial, "A Story of Two Sermons," The Presbyterian Journal, vol. XXII, no. 33, December 11, 1963, p. 10.
61G. Aiken Taylor, "A Theology for the NCC," The Presbyterian Journal, vol. XXII, no. 35, December 25, 1963, p. 8.
62Sigmund Livingston: Must Men Hate? p. 1. Cleveland: Crane Press, 1944, revised edition.
63Claude Lewis: Adam Clayton Powell, p. 124. New York: Gold Medal Books, 1963. Lewis a Negro and a Newsweek reporter, speaks of Powell as "a brilliant man who might have become a Messiah." p. 127. Lewis, lacking the consistency of thought which characterizes Powell, fails to recognize the logic and integrity of Powell's position, which one can surely dissent with, while recognizing its clarity of structure and thought.
Copyright 1965, Rousas John Rushdoony. Reprinted with permission. All Rights Reserved. Originally found in The Nature of the American System.


text:
Muse Coach ConnectJena Viviano
Career Changers, Startups, College/New Grads, Women, Finance
The Absolute Best Online Courses
There are a lot of options out there when it comes to online courses. And that's not always a good thing. So we hand-picked the ones we know and love (that also work) just for you.Find a Course


text:
Monday, December 13, 2010
Grounds for Change Review
First, I would like to Thank Grounds for Change for giving me the opportunity to do this review! Wow, this coffee is the best coffee I have every tasted, I was very impressed with how wonderful this coffee is. I received the Sumatra "Telong", Vienna Roast and the Peru "Cafe Femenino".
About Grounds for Changegift sets, which would be a perfect gift for someone on your gift list or a secret Santa gift.
Grounds for Change is a family owned and operated coffee roasting business located in the Pacific Northwest. They roast their 100% Fair Trade, Organic coffee in small batches to ensure that you receive the freshest coffee possible.
All of their coffee is Fair Trade Certified by TransFair USA and their Organic Certification meets the stringent Organic Processor Standards enforced by the United States Federal Government and the Washington State Department of Agriculture. The vast majority of the coffee they sell is also Shade Grown Coffee which ensures healthy habitat for migratory birds.
A number of community-based programs in coffee-growing countries directly benefit from the purchase of their coffee. For example, farmers in Peru and Mexico receive a higher price per pound for their coffee (above and beyond the going rate for certified coffee) to help support local domestic violence intervention programs and small business loans for women.
Grounds for Change is a sustainable business. Below are examples of what they are doing to achieve their goals:
- Use 100% renewable energy and off-set all of our CO2 emissions, including those from operations, packaging, inbound freight and outbound shipping to customers.
- Compost all of our organic waste including coffee grounds, coffee filters and food scraps.
- Purchase and print on paper made from 100% recycled content and recycle all office paper, toner cartridges, cardboard, glass, metal and plastic.
- Recycle all of our empty burlap coffee bags by donating them to local organic farmers for weed suppression and erosion control.
- Recycle all of our coffee chaff, the organic by-product of the roasting process, by giving it to local, organic farmers to be used as a nitrogen-rich soil amendment.
- Recycle all inbound freight pallets by donating them to a local business that rebuilds them for reuse.
- Donate well over 1% of our gross annual sales to social and environmental organizations as part of our membership with 1% For The Planet.
- Work closely with organizations promoting positive change including the Northwest Shade Coffee Campaign, Save Our Wild Salmon, Global Partnerships, Cafe Femenino Foundation and many other local and national non-profits.
Grounds for Change is a member of:
I received one or more of the products mentioned above for free using Tomoson.com. Regardless, I only recommend products or services I use personally and believe will be good for my readers. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commissions 16 CFR, Part 255 Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising. Tomoson Product review & giveaway Disclosure.
Posted by Bonny Sallee at 12/13/2010 02:24:00 PM
1 Awesome Comments! Thanks for visiting!:
- MrsPhilipswithoneL said...
What they are doing is awesome. If only ever company would give back just a little it would be amazing how much better things could be.
- 8:02 PM, December 14, 2010
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
Panel Discussion: Measuring Corporate Citizenship
Swagata Banik (firstname.lastname@example.com)
Wednesday, April 23, 2014 from 5:00 PM to 7:30 PM (EDT)
Who's Going
San Francisco, California
London, United Kingdom
Florence, Italy
Event Details
You are invited to attend a public panel discussion on Wednesday, April 23, 2014 at 5:00 PM at Baldwin Wallace Uuniversity's Center for Innovation and Growth: "Corporate Philanthropy, Civic Engagement, and Nonprofit Governance: Measureing our Effectiveness."
Corporate philanthropy, civic engagement, public/private phartnerships, and employee volunteerism are all vital ways that companies exercise good corporate citizenship in their surrounding communities. How can companies measure their performance and effectiveness in these areas? Are there benchmarks and best practices for measuring success? How can these efforts be best communicated and reported both internally and externally?
And on the nonprofit side, how do nonprofit organizations best fulfill their missions? How does one measure their performance in terms of organizational effectiveness and good governance practices? How can they create and nurture effective relationships with corporate, foundation and private donors? What are the best practices in this area?
Come hear an esteemed panel of experts from the corporate, foundation and nonprofit communities share their views on how we can all work together for the growth and well-being of our communities and region.
When & Where
Baldwin a Wallace University, Center for Innovation and Growth, 340 Front St., Berea, OH 44017
Wednesday, April 23, 2014 from 5:00 PM to 7:30 PM (EDT)
Add to my calendar
Swagata Banik (email@example.com)
Swagata Banik is an Associate Professor in Public Health at Baldwin Wallace University. He serves as the Chair of the Department of Public Health as well as the Director of the Center for Health Disparities Research& Education (CHDRE) at Baldwin Wallace University. Swagata's research deals with HIV/AIDS prevention, LGBT health disparities and community based participatory research (CBPR) to addressing substance abuse among vulnerable population. Swagata's current NIH- funded study proposes to develop a cognitive-behavioral intervention to reduce transphobia and HIV stigma among health care providers in India. He has published several research articles, book chapters, and has presented in numerous national and international conferences.


text:
Doctors Lounge - Neurology Answers
"The information provided on www.doctorslounge.com is designed to support, not replace, the relationship that exists between a patient/site visitor and his/her physician."
Back to Neurology Answers List
Forum Name: Neurology Topics
Question: Numbness in right fingers.
|SSJPabs - Mon Oct 22, 2007 4:33 pm
Share |
I am a law student and amateur author so I type a LOT. I don't always use the "proper" posture as it doesn't effect my typing speed.
Recently I struck my right elbow very hard in what I suspect was a nerve since it didn't "hurt" so much as a weird intense feeling. The next day I began to notice numbness in my right pinkie (small) finger and it has since spread to my right hand ring finger. The fingers also feel slightly swollen. It has been going on for 4-5 days now.
My mother suffered from intense carpal tunnel syndrome and had operations on both wrists.
Is this the first symptoms of carpal tunnel, or is it simply that I hit the nerve in my arm?
|Dr. Chan Lowe - Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:24 pm
Share |
Hi SSJPabs,
The distribution of numbness you are describing does not fit with carpal tunnel syndrome (which involves the median nerve). Instead, it fits much better with an ulnar nerve problem. In addition, it is typically the ulnar nerve that gets hit in the elbow (the funny bone).
I would recommend you see your doctor to have this further evaluated. Trauma that subsequently is causing numbness may be due to swelling and inflammation of the nerve (which will likely improve) or be due to some damage to the nerve (possibly even severing the nerve). In this case it may need more treatment to help heal properly.
Best wishes.
|| Check a doctor's response to similar questions
Are you a Doctor, Pharmacist, PA or a Nurse?
Join the Doctors Lounge online medical community
Editorial activities: Publish, peer review, edit online articles.
Ask a Doctor Teams: Respond to patient questions and discuss challenging presentations with other members.


text:
Hoping that the bugs in the new State Board of Elections website are behind us (they made improvements last week to make the site work better on a variety of browsers), we'll take a closer look at some PACs that have filed:
Vallas for Illinois – still no cash on hand, still very deep in debt. Dean Vallas made $7K in interest payments, which accounted for the only money in and out in the D2.
Citizens for Ronen – Gave the governor $5K as her biggest expenditure.
SMASH – This committee, which served as the main on-the-ground medical PAC in the 2004 Supreme Court race, is not shutting down. They raised $32K in the first half of 2005 (biggest donors are ISMIE at $5K and ISMS CEO Alexander Lerner at $1K) and ended the period with $17K on hand. More than the money, though, the big news here is that the PAC has changed its name from Southern Illinois Medical Alliance to Save Healthcare to the State of Illinois Medial Alliance…, suggesting a broader geographic focus..
Ron Gidwtiz for Governor: Hasn't filed anything with the SBE (yet), but he did take the unusual step of posting contributors on his website. Why he posted a pdf on the web rather than file electronically with the SBE we can't fathom. If he really wanted to post all donors, he could do so with the existing SBE disclosure software (and it'd be on-line and searchable. And it would list occupation and employer. And expenditures and cash on hand. But not to carp). His website shows he raised $3M through July 14. Aside from himself ($200K) and others named Gidwitz ($502K), his biggest donors appear to be Waserdorf & Associates ($250K), Robert McCormack ($100K), and T. Russell Shields ($100K). We'll know more when the D2 arrives.
The Running Totals: Because these numbers are changing all the time, I'll stop using exact figures; it's the ratios that matter.
Blagojevich: $134K
Lisa Madigan: $6K
Topinka: $24K
Gidwitz: $0 (but see above)
Oberweis: $0
Rauschenberger: $43K
Monday, July 18, 2005
No comments:
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
EU accepts Paramount's concessions over movie licensing
By Foo Yun Chee
BRUSSELS (Reuters) - EU antitrust regulators on Tuesday accepted Paramount Pictures' concessions to end anti-competitive movie-licensing deals with British pay-TV group Sky UK, but said the case against five other Hollywood studios would continue.
The U.S. studio's offer came after the European Commission in July last year accused it of preventing viewers outside Britain and Ireland from accessing films and other content broadcast by Sky UK.
NBCUniversal, Disney, Sony, Twentieth Century Fox and Time Warner Inc unit Warner Brothers as well as Sky UK also faced the charges.
Determined to create a single digital market across the 28-country EU to boost growth and jobs, the Commission is cracking down on so-called geoblocking where companies stop consumers in another EU country from buying their products or services.
Paramount Pictures, which is part of Viacom, will now allow viewers outside Britain and Ireland to access films and other content broadcast by Sky UK.
Paramount will also now allow non-UK broadcasters sell their Paramount films to UK and Irish viewers in response to unsolicited requests.
The European Commission said the concessions, which are valid for five years and cover both online services and satellite broadcast services, addressed its concerns.
Paramount Pictures did not admit any wrongdoing as part of the deal. Continued...


text: The Rangiri TV channel is mainly a Buddhist and Cultural television broadcasting service, which commenced its operations in the year 2011. Rangiri TV produces and airs content in Sinhala that is mainly focused on Buddhism and promoting Sri Lanka's national heritage. The Rangiri live TV channel seeks to provide its audience with the best in Buddhist spiritual programming, from live discussions and talk shows to educational programmes, Pirith and Dharma Deshana. The channel also airs a variety of content related to religious knowledge, societal matters, religious music (better known as 'Bhakthi Gee'), agriculture and day-to-day matters. The special children's and youth programmes aired by Rangiri, aim to inculcate Buddhist values in young minds. Patibhaa, Vision for Youth and Rangiri Ranketha are some of the most popular programmes aired by the Rangiri live TV channel online. You can tune-in to these TV shows and more, by subscribing to the Sinhala language package offered by Lyca TV.Subscribe now


text:
Times are important.
Sail Date: November 28, 2015
Reviewed: 1 year ago
Traveled As: Couple
Room Type: Oceanview
Good cruise but twice we went to restaurants marked 24/7 and they were closed. The specialty restaurants were good but the freebie ones were very stingy with some items, like mozzarella on a 6 inch sandwich was quarter sized. Could not believe it. Seems like what was typical food on a cruise years ago they now charge for as a "specialty restaurant" and the regular food went downhill (my opinion).
Entertainment overall was pretty good.
Cabins is what I expected but better off using the public restrooms, much bigger.
Will definitely use NCL again. Embarking and disembarking went pretty smooth.
In the end we enjoyed ourselves, and that is what counts.
Category Ratings
Click table then swipe to view all columns.
Click table then swipe to view all columns.
|Cabin / Stateroom
|I am a big guy and my stomach scraped the frame in the cabins toilet, use public.
|Embarkation and Disembarkation
|Ship Quality
|Destinations and Excursions
|Onboard Activities
|All might not be for everyone but there is plenty.
|Surprising the show we liked the least was the main show of the cruise.
|Service and Staff
|All were great but the one we will remember is the "washee washee, coffee coffee. guy, really wish I knew his name.
|Food and Dining
|Specialty good, free OK.
Port Ratings
Click table then swipe to view all columns.
Click table then swipe to view all columns.
|Houston, Texas
|If you hate lines, take a Prozac first.
|Cozumel, Mexico
|Belize City, Belize
|Coxen Hole, Roatan, Bay Islands, Honduras
5 Comments
Leave a Comment
Remember: Be polite and respectful. Our diverse community is home to members with different opinions and a broad range of cruise experiences.


text:
Do You Play Better After Time Off?
By Kickntrue on 10/1/09
I hear a lot of people say they play better golf after some time away. Can it really be true? The two times I hear it most are when someone plays their first round after a winter layoff, or when someone who usually golfs often ends up missing a month or so. Sometimes I feel like this can be true in my own game but it really doesn't make any sense.
What I could maybe see is that someone with swing flaws (everyone, right?) or someone who tries so hard that they end up over-thinking and over-tinkering. Maybe that first time back in awhile lets you just do what you do- without all the extras. Still- seems like you'd be better on the 10th day playing in a row than the 1st of 10.
Thoughts and experiences?
photo source
[ comments ]
bducharm says:
I do think someone can play better after a bit of time off. I shot one of my best rounds (65) after a 2 week layoff. One of the reasons is that I concentrate on fundamentals and doing things very slowly!!! I think this helps immensely.
dc8ce says:
I don't think it's the case for me. My best score ever has been after playing & practicing consistently for about 2 months straight. Recently I've been bogged down and haven't been able to get out as much and I'm hovering around the same below average (for me) score.
The key for me is limiting the "holy crap, what was that!?!" shots from my rounds, and if I'm not out there often they have a tendency to creep out.
helfon says:
I tend to play well after short breaks. My putting is usually the x factor though. This seems like something you could test though with all the data you have.
PingRhoda says:
@ dc8ce. U'm right there with ya. If I have some time off I can't see, to make a shot to save my life.
jerdman says:
I've had a lot of great rounds after not swinging a club for weeks or months. My swing is pretty well ingrained so I don't have to do a lot of thinking about it. But after I play a lot I tend to start thinking about mistakes made here and there, thinking leads to bad habits, and those bad habits end up with some high scores. Putting almost always suffers without practice.
On the other hand there have been plenty of occassions where I just flat out forget how to play and feel completely uncomfortable and end up 25 shots on the other end of the spectrum.
jevans says:
I have been wondering about this myself. Lately I have been playing 3-4 times a week and seem to be getting worse. I don't know if I'm a bit tired/sore? Is it just a concentration thing as you get tired?
I really enjoy fall golf so don't want to miss any opportunities. But I am really curious as to how I would play if I took a few weeks off.
Changed out says:
I think that you're more relaxed after a lay off I know when I start the year off I usually hit the ball pretty well. I may or may not have a short game on any given day but my expectations aren't as high so I tend to feel like I'm playing better even if the score doesn't reflect.
greendevil says:
This is me to the tee; "But after I play a lot I tend to start thinking about mistakes made here and there, thinking leads to bad habits, and those bad habits end up with some high scores".
However, the longest I can take off from golf and still play up to my standards is about a week. If I go longer than a week I seem to forget how to play the game altogether.
The Full Monty says:
Before playing 2-3 days per week, I would agree that time off can seem to improve your game because you remove the biggest obstacle - your brain.
However, I've spent more time golfing this year than any other and have gained better control and confidence in all aspects of the game through routine and muscle memory. Also, the # of penalty strokes has dropped to 1 or less per round.
For me, 2+ weeks off causes a good 3-5 stroke increase per round. You lose the touch in your short game, putts, stiffing the pin from 120, and ability to control long drives.
For the first 5 weeks of this season, I had a serious case of the "S Words" with all irons over the 7. For anyone who's had this, it's scary beyond comprehension. Working on the problem at the range and course, as opposed to time off, helped me shoot scores under 90 consistently and shave 5 strokes off the handicap.
Different strokes for different folks though...
Banker85 says:
@amonty: that is one of the scariest words in the golfers dictionary! i had a case of them in june earlier this year. it was awful! back to the article i find that when i take a couple weeks (no more than two) it helps me relax and justenjoy it a lil more. where when i start playing alot 3-4 times a week i start raising my expectations. also when you take some time off you better get to that putting green before your round cause that is where you forget your feel.
rynolinks says:
i hadn't broken 90 yet playing consistently 1-3 times a month, then after a month and a half off, i shot an 85: it seemed that a lot of the mechanical swing thoughts i had forgotten and was focused on each shot and feel and just a single swing thought or two.
[ post comment ]
Most Popular:


text: 1936 Ford 2 Door Sedan Humpback Beautifully crafted, highly customized 1936 Ford 2 Door Sedan Humpback. This car started off as a full metal body and transformed into this stunning work of art. Countless custom details and features make this a truly unique ride, from the frenched taillights, chopped roofline, and beautiful headlight integration to the handmade grill. This car must be seen to truly appreciate the attention to detail. The specs are as follows: -The stunning full-metal body is sitting on a modified first generation Ford Crown Victoria (1991-1997) frame, utilizing the complete front and rear subframes. Power steering and power disc brakes are used right from the Crown Victoria. -The rear end uses the Ford 8.8 on a 4 link, along with the complete rear Crown Victoria subframe which provides factory accuracy and alignment. -The Engine is a 1997 Ford 4.6 liter Modular V8 SOHC. -The Transmission is a Ford 4R70W 4 speed overdrive electronic automatic. -The car is sitting on 17" alloys with Avon Z rated performance tires. -Custom unique interior upholstery, with matching seats, door panel and headliner design. Interior features a unique center console and power windows. This car rides exceptionally well due to the usage of the Crown Victoria underpinnings. Never has there been a hot rod that rides so smooth, drives this well, looks this good. This car even gets excellent fuel economy to boot.


text:
What will q6a be?
What will q5 be?
Any tips for some1 who knows nothing about history but wants to scrape a B.
Q6 (A) could be middle ages
For the long questions in it know the training of a medieval craftsman and a serf of a medieval manor
or renaissance know the developments in painting, sculpting, printing and architecture
Q5 will most likely be reformation or industrial revolution and famine
For reformation know the council of Trent, courts of inquisition and Jesuits
For industrial revolution and famine know the consequences of famine of Irish society and life in industrial Britain
Good Luck!
In renaissance - medicine and science also


text:
50% silk & 50% cotton, machine washable cold/gentle. Raw hem, soft knit tank, wear alone or layered. Reverse knit. The knit tanks are a shop favorite; they're addictive.
Available in grape, white, citrus & black.
Lovingly hand knit in Nepal
ps- Don't mind our rainbow :) It's not on the tank, just the photo!
Please gift wrap my order for an additional $ 10.00.


text:
Kumble, who is now the fifth bowler to claim 500 Test wickets, captured the wickets of opener Andrew Strauss (13), Ian Bell (57) and Paul Collingwood (14). His tally of wickets has now risen to 504 in 105th Test.
Harbhajan Singh and medium pacer Munaf Patel got one wicket each.
Munaf gave India the first breakthrough having opener Alasair Cook (2) caught by wicketkeeper Mahendra Singh Dhoni. England had only seven runs on the board then.
Harbhajan then removed dangerous Kevin Pietersen (4), who had contributed 64 runs in England's first innings total of 300 all out, caught by Dravid at first slip.
Dhoni was outstanding behind the wickets as he accepted three sharp catches while, Dravid, positioned at first slip, grabbed two catches.
Kumble was going great guns in England's second innings. He had left-handed opener Strauss out for a bat-and-pad decision given after it was referred to the third umpire.
Collingwood also fell in Kumble's trap. The ace leg-spinner first wasted a difficult chance to accept a return catch after running a few yards. However, he got him caught by Dravid in the slip in the same over for 14.
With the departure of Collingwood, the visitors were virtually fighting with their back to the wall as they were four down with the scorecard reading just 88.
Kumble then broke the backbone of England batting when he had the dangerous Ian Bell who completed his half century (57) with the help of seven fours from 137 balls.
Harbhajan was lucky to be awarded the wicket of Kevin Peitersen.
His delivery hit the forearm of Pietersen but was given out, caught by Dravid at first slip.
Earlier, Munaf Patel claimed his fourth wicket on debut after sending Alastair Cook (2), caught by Dhoni, to the pavilion.
The medium pacer from Gujarat had bagged three wickets in England's first innings.
At close of play on the penultimate day, captain Andrew Flintoff and wicketkeeper Geraint Jones were batting on 16 and one respectively.
With only one day left in the Test, England were just 74 runs ahead with five second innings wickets in hand. The Test is now poised for an interesting finish.
Earlier, the hosts' tail wagged as Kumble (32) and Harbhajan (36) made valuable contributions to consolidate the good work done by captain Rahul Dravid and Irfan Pathan and helped India take a handy 38-run first innings lead, scoring 338 all out in reply to England's 300. This was after Dravid made a cautious 95 and Pathan struck a quickfire 52 to carry India to safety from their overnight total of 149 for six to 269 for seven at lunch.
Dravid, who came at the fall of open Virender Sehwag's wicket at 18 yesterday, played the sheet anchor's role guiding India to safety before he returned to the pavillion five short of century.
He stayed at the wicket for 322 minutes and faced 208 deliveries slamming 10 fours, including two fine cover drives and one boundary at third man in one Andrew Flintoff over.
But the England captain got his revenge soon when he uprooted Dravid's middle stump by a ball which nipped back from off.
The Indian captain's sixth-wicket partnership with Pathan yielded valuable 76 runs which were compiled in 82 minutes and from 99 deliveries.
Dravid's dismissal silenced the crowd which was looking forward to a hundred from him.
Meanwhile, Pathan's hurricane 52 came from 58 deliveries after occupying the crease for 109 minutes. He slammed five fours and one six before he was caught by Paul Collingwood off the bowling of Flintoff.
Pathan drove off the front foot and Collingwood at backward point accepted the catch.
For the visitors, Flintoff was the most successful bowler as he claimed four wickets for 86 runs.