text:
Note: Cases linked in the text on the right are either to BAILII reports (where available) or the Wikipedia reference.
Dr John Birchall
1. Introduction
2. Types of Trust
Key caselaw archive
Latest caselaw
Student Subscription
Subscribe to the 2009 Weekly Law Reports & Receive All Parts for 2008 Free!
That's just £90 (£96 overseas) for two years' worth of parts (standard UK subscription cost for 2009: £450).
0207 242 6471
Equity is often regarded as a difficult subject by students, and among practitioners as a technical subject best left to lawyers who specialise in it. From the point of view of the student who is preparing for an exam, learning a list of cases well is no guarantee of success. Equity lawyers have a particular style of thinking which must be learned before the student's memorised list of cases can be used effectively. It is best learned by reading cases. Alongside the reading of cases, it is useful to read the historical and conceptual analyses found in textbooks and academic literature. Each writer will have his or her own take on the subject.
A student might ask, why should trusts and Equity be taught on the same course? Why are they part of the same subject in the first place? And, supposing they belong together historically, why should a student who will one day be a commercial equity practitioner spend so much time on family trusts, when other aspects of Equity will be more important in the 'real world'? This last question becomes more pointed when one takes into account that the bits of Equity which relate to contract law have long been taught in courses on contract law and (on the whole) left out of courses on Equity.
First, the historical question. A trust is structure where one person or group of persons is treated as the technical owner of property (the trustees), but a different person (or group of persons) is entitled to enjoy the benefit of that property (the beneficiaries). For example if a house is registered in the name of two trustees, they are technical owners, and can buy and sell that house, but since they hold it on trust, someone else is entitled to the benefit of the house, (for example, the benefit of the right to collect rent, or to live in the house, or to lend the house to a friend). The person who sets up the trust is called the settlor, and the settlor might give the house (for example) in trust to the trustees and make certain stipulations about how they should manage it, and which benefits should be allowed to pass to the beneficiaries, and when. Since the legal owner is not allowed to use the trust property for his own enjoyment, although he is in control of it, a trust can only function reliably where there is a legal system which supervises trustees to ensure they do not abuse their position, for example to ensure the trustees do not abuse the fact that a house is technically in their name, when they should be looking after it for someone else's benefit. There is no absolute reason why the Common Law could not have adapted itself to regulate trusts and trustees. However, the courts of Law had a tradition of regulating property rights according to strict rules, and courts of Equity had a tradition of preventing people who controlled property from abusing their legal rights, or from doing things which, though technically legal, were plainly unfair. Therefore it is not surprising that the jurisprudence of the Chancery Court was, in the event, adaptable enough to regulate trusts and prevent unjust behaviour by trustees, and the rules of the Common Law were not.
Turning now to the second question: why not teach students who want to know enough Equity for commercial work, the parts of the subject they will need, without spending so much time on express trusts, which had (and still have) more to do with planning family wealth? Four points can be made in reply. First, it makes practical sense for students to get an overview of the work of Chancery courts. Equitable principles in contract law usually arise these days in Common Law courts, since those courts are already dealing with the other aspects of contract cases, but the matter covered in courses on Equity are all usually dealt with in Chancery courts. Second, because trusts have historically been a large part of Chancery work, much of the thinking, and general principles of Equity can be found in cases dealing with trusts. Third, trusts are important in modern investment law. Whilst an investment trust may be significantly different than a family trust, the historical principles found in trust cases are even more relevant to investment trusts, than they are to general commercial Chancery practice. Fourth, the thinking behind the question is, in the present writer's view, to some extent justified: whilst there are good reasons why Equity and Trusts courses need to cover key cases dealing with family wealth planning and tax panning, there is a strong case for changing the balance of courses to give more emphasis to problems encountered in modern commercial Chancery practice. Subsets of Equity courses tend cover disputes over ownership of, and rights in a family home, which is important in practice; and charitable trusts, a niche area which arguably gets more coverage than it needs on modern general courses on Equity and Trusts.
Note on terms
The terms Equity, and Chancery law (that is, the law first developed and applied in the English Court of Chancery, when it existed as a separate court) are used interchangeably. Traditionally lawyers speak about the analysis of a case 'at Law' and 'in Equity. The supervision of trusts is one element of the equitable jurisdiction. In the present work Equity is given a capital letter to distinguish the use of the word as the name for a recognized branch of law, as distinct from its use in general English to mean something like 'fairness.' 'Law' is also given a capital letter to distinguish the set of rules technically known as 'Common Law' or 'Law' (in contrast to Equity) from 'law' used more loosely and more generally. The present author does not regard this use of capitals as a strict rule, and many judges and distinguished writers will use lower case letters where the present writer has chosen capitals.
The concept of the trust has proved useful in modern finance, and in tax planning. Various kinds of injunction, which have been developed from the Chancery court's jurisdiction to make orders in personam , ordering, or more usually, forbidding a person or persons from doing some specified act, are also hugely important in modern commercial law. This is one of the reasons why Common Law (as distinct from the legal systems of continental Europe) is often regarded as the best system for regulating business. However, Equity arose as a competitor to Common Law (in its narrow definition), so that the law courts and the court of Chancery were for centuries 'rival' courts, applying different legal rules, and coming to different conclusions in the same case. For example, a claimant might obtain a valid judgment at Common Law, and be forbidden from enforcing that judgement by a court of Equity.
This led to the situation depicted by Dickens in Bleak House where a case has become very long and expensive partly because of the competing jurisdictions of Law and Equity. In Chapter 8, Dickens writes:
Equity sends questions to law, law sends questions back to equity; law finds it can't do this, equity finds it can't do that; neither can so much as say it can't do anything, without this solicitor instructing and this counsel appearing for A, and that solicitor instructing and that counsel appearing for B; and so on through the whole alphabet, like the history of the apple pie.
In some editions (1) there is a preface in which Dickens asserts that in real life the Chancery Court created just such problems. The solution to this problem was the fusion of the jurisdictions of the Common Law and Chancery courts, discussed briefly below.
The division, of course, raises of the problem of how to resolve the conflict when the Common Law courts and the courts of Equity come to conflicting conclusions in the same case. Every Equity textbook refers to the Earl of Oxford's case (2) as the turning point at which it was decided that where Equity and Law conflict, Equity wins. The decisive document is not the case itself, but the order issued by the king, on the advice of Francis Bacon and others, which orders in effect that where there is a dispute, Equity wins. (3 - A phrase used by Lord Denning in White & Ors v Vandervell Trustees Ltd. (No. 2) [1974] EWCA Civ 7 (03 July 1974) , and adopted by other judges. ) Legal historians tend to treat the resolution of the dispute between Equity and Law as being politically motivated, but, as one would expect with the involvement of Bacon, the decision does set out good legal reasons for the principle.
This document, just mentioned, in which James I orders that Equity should prevail over Common Law where they come to conflicting conclusions in a case, is an important building block in setting up the traditional narrative that Common Law deals with property according to fixed rules, and that 'Equity steps in to mitigate the rigour of the law'(4) in cases where the law to a result which feels unjust. The narrative is developed in historical introductory sections to some of the leading textbooks, in more detail than is necessary here. (5) Roughly speaking, this narrative says that the Chancellor, on behalf of the monarch, could overrule Common Law courts, on the basis that their judgment had led to a palpable injustice; and that the rules of Equity according to which the Chancellor's court decided cases were gradually fixed by the establishment of a set of principles and by precedents, in particular by the eighteenth century judge, politician, and Chancellor, Lord Hardwicke. This narrative is important not only as a bit of history, but because it informs the way judges and lawyers think about Equity.
One consequence of what I call the 'narrative' about the role of Equity is the point is that when dealing with a question which raises an issue to which both Common Law and Equity are relevant, the court should know, or decide, what legal rights are involved before applying the rules of Equity. Not only was this well understood at the time of James I's decision that Eqity prevails over Law, but it is noted in that document that judges in Common Law courts would sometimes tell litigants that their hands were tied by the Law, and specifically recommend turning to Equity.
In fact, Chancery lawyers go a step further than the proposition that legal rights be decided first, with the maxim, Equity follows the Law. Maxims of Equity will be treated later, but this particular maxim says that the rules of Equity do not claim to override the law, but to create additional rights, and / or additional remedies not available at law. Of course the practical outcome might be to override the law. From the student's point of view, where a question or scenario raises a legal question, this should be dealt with before the rules of Equity are applied, bearing in mind that technically speaking, Equity does not take away any legal rights.
The narrative about the development of Equity also reinforces the principle that Equity affects the conscience of the holder of a legal right, or more generally that a court of Equity is a Court of Conscience. The idea that a court of Equity is a court of conscience is very ancient, and it has been suggested that it did not at first mean what it means today. (6) The idea that Equity grew up to mitigate the rigour of the law incorporates the idea sometimes an outcome to a case which is legally correct is plainly wrong. The term 'conscience' in Equity is used as shorthand to describe the principle that a court of Equity should provide an outcome to a case which is equitable, and which Equity regards as the right outcome. Put like that, the argument is somewhat circular, but the concept is significant because when a court has to go back to the most fundamental principle of Equity in order to determine the correct outcome of a particular case, it can still ask, 'was the behaviour of the defendant consistent with a good conscience.'
This raises the question of what 'conscience' means. One approach, since lawyers tend to use the word as if it is readily understood, is to examine just what 'conscience' is normally understood in ordinary English. This task is undertaken by Professor Alastair Hudson in an essay on his website. (7)
Courts in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, in resolving the question of what was and what was not consistent with good conscience, would sometimes offer a legal analysis of just what conscience involves. Such analyses would of course be found in cases where the very foundation and scope of Equity became an issue. The law of God was often appealed to (though in the Earl of Oxford's Case, God's law, and the demands of 'good conscience and equity' are parallel grounds rather than part of the same argument).
Many writers deny that there is any unifying principle in modern Equity, and there have been judicial comments denying that the Chancery Division of the High Court is a court of conscience. This is an inevitable concommitant of the application of a doctrine of binding precedent in Equity. When following precedent leads to a result which feels unjust, a court of Equity may produce an unjust result, one which is contrary to conscience. A second problem with the view that conscience is still a unifying principle in Equity is that Equity tends to remedy infringements of property rights, and ingore other kinds of wrong, a point brought out strongly in Emperor of Austria v DayEmperor of Austria v Day, (11) discussed later in this chapter. Nevertheless, not only does conscience inform the development of the rules of Equity, but the concept of 'conscience' can still be resorted to in a case where the court must analyse the scope of Equity from first principles. This is what Lord Brown-Wilkinson did in Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington LBC. (8)In that case, the defendant's awareness that a transaction may be illegitimate is an ingredient in deciding whether his conscience is affected (or in plain in English, should be affected). The test for a situation where Equity steps in, seems to be that property rights must be in issue (though the modern injunction seems to extend beyond property rights), and that a reasonable and impartial observer would say either 'that action is not fair, and the law ought to remedy it, even if the common law does not' or 'if that is the outcome the law decides, the law is unjust.' That is the present author's attempt to describe what 'conscience,' as the fundamental principle of Equity, is. Exactly what 'feels' fair to a reasonable person is of course not fixed, and there will be cases which fall into a grey area. For example, what level or degree of knowledge does someone have to have that his action might unjustifiably hurt another person's property interests, before Equity will treat him as dishonest, and deserving to be forced make good any loss which his action has caused? This question has caused the English courts some difficulty in recent years, though it is beyond the scope of the present chapter to deal with it in detail.
Looking through the cases where the fundamental nature of Equity is considered, one finds that some cases emphasise the unconscionableness of the action for which a remedy is sought. Others, where the facts of the case call for it, emphasise the unconscionabless of the outcome to a problem which the Common Law does (or arguably may) provide. This is reflected in the phrase 'Equity mitigates the rigour of the law.' Whilst this precise wording seems to go back to Lord Denning, earlier judges had expressed the point in very similar terms. One often quoted passage from Lord Dudley v Lady Dudley, on the nature of Equity, emphasises this aspect of Equity. In it, the Chancellor (not named in the report), speaking in 1705, clearly adheres to the view that Equity is guided by a unifying principle:
Now equity is no part of the law, but a moral virtue, which qualifies, moderates, and reforms the rigour, hardness, and edge of the law, and is an universal truth; it does also assist the law where it is defective and weak in the constitution (which is the life of the law) and defends the law from crafty evasions, delusions, and new subtleties, invented and contrive to evade and delude the common law, whereby such as have undoubted right are made remediless; and this is the office of equity, to support and protect the common law from shifts and crafty contrivances against the justice of the law. Equity therefore does not destroy the law, nor create it, but assist it. (9- Lord Dudley and Ward, an infant, by the Honourable Thomas Newport, versus the Lady Dowager Dudley, [1705] EngR 25; (1705) Prec Ch 241; 24 E.R. 118 (1 January 1705) )
The 'decay' of Equity
However, during the eighteenth century rules of Equity grew up, and cases were increasingly decided according to rules rather than according to the court's assessment of what good conscience required. One reads everywhere that Lord Seldon objected to the idea that the Court of Chancery should make decisions according to the length of the Chancellor's foot (in other words, he objected to the idea that Chancery judges should take arbitrary decisions rather than following predictable principles). It is worth reading the passage where this well-known saying is found:
[I]it is my duty to submit my judgment to the authority of those who had gone before me. The doctrines of this Court ought to be as well settled and made as uniform almost as those of the common law, laying down fixed principles, but taking care that they are to be applied according to the circumstances of each case. I cannot agree that the doctrines of this Court are to be changed with every succeeding Judge. Nothing would in inflict on me greater pain in quitting this place, than the recollection that I had done anything to justify the reproach that the equity of this Court varies like the Chancellor's foot. (10)
On the face of this quotation it is not entirely clear whether it amounts to an assertion that Equity is governed by binding precedent, or only by strongly persuasive precedent. In the same case Lord Seldon said that he had no jurisdiction to make an injunction to prevent the commission of a crime, only to prevent an infringement of a property right, and Lord Seldon seems to regard some authorities as binding as to principle, but flexible as to interpretation. This is still true in the sense that in spite of some dicta to the contrary, there is no doubt that Chancery courts are subject to the doctrine of binding precedent, but equitable remedies remain discretionary. However, the discretion of the court in deciding whether to award an Equitable remedy is itself circumscribed by precedent.
The in personam jurisdiction of Equity
If Equity reaches decisions on the basis that a defendant, or a holder of a legal title, should not act in a way which does or ought to give him a bad conscience, it makes sense that the remedies provided by Equity should be remedies directing the actions of a person, rather than remedies in rem , that is, remedies which makes decisions about property. For example, is is obvious that an English court cannot make a decision about the ownership of a house in Spain, because that kind of questions is normally in the exclusive jurisdiction of a Spanish court. However, an English court of Equity can make an injunction ; against a defendant within its jurisdiction, ordering him to transfer the ownership of a house in Spain to another person, or to refrain from action. Courts are of course reluctant to do anything which looks like interference with the competence of a foreign jurisdiction to regulate property in the area it is responsible for, but it is not unusual for an English court to make an injunction, (originally, at least, an equitable remedy), ordering a litigation not to start or pursue proceedings in a foreign court.
Therefore the distinction between a right in rem , and right in personam is sometimes significant. For this reason, with few exceptions, an Equitable remedy orders a person to do something or not to do something. Thus, in ordinary English almost every equitable remedy can be called an injunction, though technically the term 'injunction' is normally used for an order designed to prevent a wrong before it happens
Both the scope of the jurisdiction to grant an injunction, and the way in which an injunction can extend to matters of which English courts have no legal (ie Common Law) jurisdiction, is illustrated in Emperor of Austria v Day. (11) A Hungarian revolutionary (Kossuth), who was living in England, had hired an English printing firm (Day) to print Hungarian banknotes, which he planned to put into circulation after the revolution in which he hoped Hungary would break away from the authority of the Austrian Emperor. The notes were intended for use only in Hungary, and the Austrian Emperor as plaintiff was domiciled abroad. He asked the court for an injunction stopping the printing of notes, and asking for already printed notes to be handed over to him. The Lord Chancellor and Turner LJ, upholding the Vice Chancellor on appeal, decided that they had no jurisdiction to grant an injunction to prevent a revolution; they also held that the infringement of the sovereign's right to print money was a matter to be resolved between states, and not in a private suit in Equity. However, an injunction was awarded on the basis that the Chancery Court did have jurisdiction to protect the Austrian Emperor's property interests, which would be threatened if a rival currency were introdued.
Since legal rights must be determined before equitable rights or remedies can be considered, the problem discussed above in the section on 'The downside of the division between Law and Equity' can arise in any case where there is room for dispute about a legal right as well as about some question which comes within the scope of Equity. The case would have to go before a court of Law to determine the legal position, and then go before a Chancery court to decide the equitable question. The obvious solution is to allow a single court to have jurisdiction to deal with both equitable as well as legal questions, and to award equitable as well as legal remedies. The theoretical difficulty with this is that the older courts, such as the Kings Bench, and the Court of Chancery, grew up with a jurisdiction derived, in effect, from tradition and from the fiat of the monarchy. The scope of that jurisdiction is a matter of history and precedent. The English High Court still has such an 'inherent' jurisdiction, which is not defined by statute (unlike the modern Court of Appeal, which derives its jurisdiction from statutory authority). There was perhaps a reluctance to allow a statute to interfere with something as important as the jurisdiction of the king's courts. When a new court was to be set up by statute, the problem did not arise. Therefore when small claims courts were established in English towns, they had mixed legal and equitable jurisdiction. (12) See e.g. Silk versus Rennett, Un c [1764] EngR 80; (1764) 3 Burr 1583; 97 ER 993 (A) Such courts were at first called 'Courts of Conscience' (or 'Courts of Request'), which is confusing because the term 'Court of Conscience' is also used for the Chancery Court (and for the concept of conscience as deciding moral issues in theology). The first was established in London in the reign of Henry VIII.
However, a more substantial problem with combining the juriscitons was that Equity and Common Law had different procedural systems. The most obvious difference was that in Equity cases are heard without a jury, whereas Common Law cases were (and in the USA generally still can be) decided by a jury. Therefore, when the so-called Supreme Court was created in England and Wales by the Judicature Acts, initially in 1873 and 1875, with both equitable and legal jurisdiction in the same court, and with the Queens Bench and Chancery divisions both empowered to award both equitable and legal remedies, it was necessary to devise a new system of pleading and new procedural rules which would work for both kinds of jurisdiction.
Similar fusion has taken place in other jurisdictions at various dates. In the United States, the federal courts and most state courts have concurrent equitable and legal jurisdiction, although the state of Delaware retains a specialised Chancery Court. The Delaware Chancery Court derives much of its work from the fact that Delaware is the favourite state in the USA for the registration of companies. The Judicature Acts were also adopted in Australia, (apart from New South Wales, where jurisdiction was fused in 1972), and in other Commonwealth countries.
One consequence of the fusion of courts of Equity and courts of Law has been a tendency for the rules of Equity and the rules of Law to be combined into a single integrated system. There are contradictory comments by judges and lawyers on the extent to which the two systems are fused. The question sometimes has practical importance, in particular when the question arises, whether it is possible to award Common Law damages in a case of a wrong which is recognized as a wrong by Equity rather than by Law; or conversely, whether it is possible to award an equitable remedy, for example a 'remedial' constructive trust, to remedy a Common Law wrong.
One factor tending to preserve the distinctness of Equity is that in some jurisdictions, particularly in London, lawyers and judges conducting Chancery work tend to be specialists in Chancery work, and so to maintain some of the traditions of the Chancery court and its jurisprudence. Chancery work has also retained its vitality because of the way it has been flexible enough to adapt to some of the needs of modern commercial affairs. It is clearly important for Common Law and Equity to function in a co-ordinated manner. However, it is also important that lawyers preserve a sense of the historical roots of Equity, a sense which helps to promote a deep understanding of this style of juridical thought, and maintain the quality of decisions which are made on the basis of equitable principles. For a more detailed discussion of fusion, with particular reference to Australia, the present writer respectfully commends K. Mason, 'Fusion: Fallacy, Future, or Finished' (2004), on the website of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. (13)
(1) The Preface is included in the e-text at http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/1023
(2) [1615] EngR 2; (1615) 1 Rep Ch 1; 21 E.R. 485 (1 January 1615), http://www.commonlii.org/int/cases/EngR/1615/ Research note: The English Reports are a nineteenth century edited reprint of the published English law reports before law reporting was systematised. Few libraries hold the dozens of publications which appeared over the centuries, so it is useful to have them all brought together in one set of books, which most law libraries should have. The English reports give the reference to the original publication, and page numbers in square brackets in the text allow readers to identify the page in the original publication where the text appeared. The reference to the English Reports give the volume number and page number in English Reports itself. English Reports are now available electronically. The most important cases are now also available free on the internet on the www.commonlii.org website, and links to this are given here. The search facility on that website is useful, but sometimes gives incorrect dates. No good student ever cites a case without checking it, but with this database, the chances of an unchecked reference being wrong are very high.
(3) The King's Order and Decree in Chancery [1616] EngR 1; (1616) Cary 115; 21 E.R. 61 (1 January 1616) http://www.commonlii.org/int/cases/EngR/1616/1.pdf
(3) A phrase used by Lord Denning in White & Ors v Vandervell Trustees Ltd. (No. 2) [1974] EWCA Civ 7 (03 July 1974) http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1974/7.html , and adopted by other judges.
(5) For example, G. Watt Equity and Trusts (3rd ed. 2008). At time of writing, the first chapter is available fir free download on OUP's website for the book: http://www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/9780199230266/
(6) M R Macnair, 'Equity and Conscience' (2007) Oxford Journal of Legal Studies (e-pub).
(7) http://www.alastairhudson.com/equity/equityindex.htm
(8) [1996] UKHL 12 (22 May 1996) http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1996/12.html
(9) Lord Dudley and Ward, an infant, by the Honourable Thomas Newport, versus the Lady Dowager Dudley, &c & econt' [1705] EngR 25; (1705) Prec Ch 241; 24 E.R. 118 (1 January 1705); http://www.commonlii.org/int/cases/EngR/1705/25.pdf
(10) Gee v Pritchard, (1818) 2 Swanst. 414
(11)The Emperor of Austria v Day and Kossuth [1861] EngR 688; (1861) 3 De G F J 217; 45 ER 861 http://www.commonlii.org/int/cases/EngR/1861/688.pdf
(12) See e.g. Silk versus Rennett, Un c [1764] EngR 80; (1764) 3 Burr 1583; 97 ER 993 (A) http://www.commonlii.org/int/cases/EngR/1764/80.pdf
(13) http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/Supreme_Court/ll_sc.nsf/pages/SCO_mason161204
Wildy & Sons
Get the Equity widget and many other great free widgets at Widgetbox!
Buy latest books from Wildy's
Wildy's new books RSS feed
Equity & Trusts Text
Alastair Hudson
ISBN13: 9780415497718 ISBN: 041549771X Published: July 2009 Publisher: Routledge-Cavendish Country of Publication: UK Binding: Paperback Price: £32.99
Amazon.co.uk Widgets


text:
The Begging Contest is officially over folks, and the judges are set for deliberation. We receive almost 150 entries, and let me tell you the competition is fierce! It is going to take us a while to go through these all and pick the very best of the best, so I will be announcing the winner on Monday, March 3rd! Stay tuned right here at American Muscle for the official winner announcements of the BLOG Begging Contest!
For full contest details, click here!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Sunday, December 21, 2014
Follow us:
Time Warner Cable video customers:Sign in with your TWC ID to access our video clips.
Sign in
To view our videos, you need to
install Adobe Flash 9 or above. Install now.
Then come back here and refresh the page.
As one director recently found out, the New York Film Festival isn't just about new movies, it's also about the preservation and restoration of older films with cultural significance. NY1's Shazia Khan filed the following report.
In 1981, New York-based director Sara Driver made a film based on a short story by famed Beat Generation writer Paul Bowles. Called "You Are Not I," it tells the story of a woman who escapes from an asylum, and it played widely on the international film circuit.
Years later, a leak in a New Jersey warehouse destroyed the film's only negative, and Driver thought her hidden gem was lost forever.
"The people that worked on the film, I never confessed to them that it went missing," said Driver. "I've only told them recently, because I felt I couldn't even talk about it. It was so devastating."
One of those people was acclaimed filmmaker Jim Jarmusch, Driver's partner in New York City's post-punk downtown film scene.
"Jim shot the movie, and he co-wrote the screenplay with me. And it was a time in the early 80's when we made this film where we were all working on each other's movies. I was producing Jim's movies. I produced 'Permanent Vacation' and 'Stranger Than Paradise' for him. And then he did the camera for me on this film and on my first feature," Driver said.
Driver soldiered on with her career, resigned to the fact that "You Are Not I" was lost to history. But her story had an unexpected twist.
"I got a phone call in the summer of 2010 that they had found a copy of the film among Paul Bowles' things, the writer whose story I adapted. And they had a pristine print that had been sitting in Tangier for 30 years. We think it's the bug powder that saved the film," said Driver. "It was a heavy heart to know, to think that the film would never be seen again. So this is like a miracle really that it was found and that it's been revived."
Thanks to a grant from The Women's Film Preservation Fund of New York, "You Are Not I" has been newly restored and is screening at the 49th annual New York Film Festival.
For more information, visit www.filmlinc.com.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
© 1999-2014 Time Warner Cable Enterprises LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Web design and web development by Tipit.


text:
Special Experimental Project No. 14 (SEP 14)
Alternative Contracting
January 5, 2009
The Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) has nine (9) Transportation Maintenance Districts statewide (see attached map or http://www.aot.state.vt.us/Maint/mainthome.htm). The Districts are responsible for all maintenance activities on the state highway system. Each District is managed by a District Transportation Administrator (DTA).
The VTrans Maintenance Districts accomplish their scheduled roadway and bridge preventive maintenance, preservation and repair projects using state forces and contractors to do the work. In some cases, a combination of state forces and contractors are used together to accomplish project objectives. Historically, State dedicated funds have been used for these activities.
When contractors are utilized to accomplish work, they are obtained through the use of Maintenance Rental Agreements (MRA). The MRA instrument is a non-determinate location/non-determinate quantity type contract. The prices in the MRA are based on the estimated labor and equipment to perform the work. All costs are based on local pricing (local prevailing wage rates, overhead and profit and risk assessment and equipment costs). In general, contractors provide rates for various locations throughout the state where they want to do work. This proven method is suitable for addressing the various preventive maintenance, preservation and repair needs of the state.
All contractors that are responsive to meet the requirements of the MRA Request for Proposal (RFP) are awarded contracts through the VTrans Contract Administration Section but administered by the Operations Division. There is no guarantee of work assignments. Once a work project is developed, contractor selection is then based on the lowest rates, experience, and availability. In some cases, contractors are requested for lump sum contracts to provide labor, equipment, and materials.
With more than 18 years of experience using MRA contracts, VTrans has been able to address numerous "smaller" infrastructure needs in both a timely and cost-effective manner. However, because of the nature of the MRA, federal-aid participation with this instrument has generally been limited to "emergency" situations (CFR 635.204(b)). Moreover, seeking to address small preventive maintenance, preservation, and repair type projects with federal-aid participation is often cumbersome and time-consuming because of the required federal-aid competitive bidding process and procedures. Since State maintenance dollars for these types of projects can not often be leveraged against federal dollars, smaller infrastructure needs often go unaddressed until more significant damage ensues requiring much more costly repairs.
The purpose of this work plan is to provide a format to evaluate the use of Federal-aid for Maintenance Rental Agreements (MRA) to address various contracting needs. Specifically, VTrans is requesting Federal-aid participation on Category II MRA under the Federal "Alternative Contracting" Special Experimental Project No. 14 (SEP-14) program. The VTrans Procedures for procuring Category II MRA are attached.
VTrans is requesting approval to use federal-aid funds - HBR, STP, and/or IM - to participate in three categories of work for preventive maintenance, preservation, and repair activities under the SEP-14 "Alternative Contracting" program. The three categories of work to be done using MRA Category II contracts and State maintenance forces are as follows:
The duration of this program will be 3 years from the date of approval.
Overall federal-aid participation will be limited to $9 million total over the 3 year period. This level of funding equates to approximately 2% of the federal-aid dollars (not including earmarks) available to VTrans to accomplish their mission.
This alternative contracting method will utilize contractors through MRA contracts, and in some cases address project needs using a combination of both state forces and contractors. It is expected that when state forces are used for actual construction work, the percentage of a project's cost applicable to state force participation will generally be in the order of 10 to 20 percent. However, in some cases, project costs attributable to state force participation in the actual construction work may exceed 20 percent. Thus, to provide flexibility to the State with respect to force account participation (on a project by project basis) as well as to limit the overall use of state forces for this alternative contracting method, federal-aid participation (reimbursement) in state force costs for actual construction work will be limited to 20 percent of the overall total spent on this alternative contracting program.
The VTrans Operations Division will act as the overall administrator of this "Alternative Contracting" program. However, the VTrans Program Development Division (PDD) with the assistance of the Operations Division will be responsible for developing appropriate projects. Additionally, VTrans PDD with the assistance of the Operations Division will be responsible for submitting annual status reports and a final evaluation report to FHWA.
Each MRA will be administered in general accordance with the guidelines established in the VTrans Maintenance Rental Agreement Procedures, the VTrans Force Account Guidance, and the VTrans Materials Quality Assurance Program (with exceptions as noted in this "alternative contracting" proposal). These documents discuss the various state and federal requirements that typically need to be addressed for VTrans projects, including but not limited to: PS&E development, environmental permitting and NEPA, utility and ROW certifications, and materials quality assurance and control.
Quality Assurance for the projects advanced under the SEP-14 request will be handled in accordance with the local FHWA Division office's approved Quality Assurance Program (QAP).
VTrans PDD will keep records for each federal-aid project within each overall MRA contract. Project records will include a PS&E (plans, specifications, and estimate), but the PS&E package will generally be of a more limited and simplified nature when compared to the typical competitive bid package. Records will include any appropriate certifications, environmental permits, contract documents, etc. that may be required to accomplish the project (ex. ROW and utility certifications, CE, stream alteration permit, etc.). Actual project costs will be tracked. Included in cost tracking will be the portion of project costs attributable to contractors, to state administration of the project, and to state force account participation in the actual physical construction work when applicable.
Additional program criteria include:
For the duration of the program VTrans will track and report various items and evaluate the effectiveness of this federal-aid alternative contracting method.
Of primary importance are answers to the following concerns:
Some additional specific areas of interest are:
Interviews with VTrans staff involved with the letting and execution of MRA contracts, along with contractors, will be conducted to determine how the MRA process compares to the traditional contracting mechanism.
Three reports - initial, interim, and final - will be developed for this alternative contracting program. Reports will be submitted to the local FHWA Division office in electronic form. These reports will be forwarded to FHWA Headquarters (HIPA-30) by the local FHWA Division office.
Within 2 months of the conclusion of the first year of the program, VTrans PDD with the assistance of Operations will submit an initial status report to FHWA. The report will provide a listing (spreadsheet acceptable) of the projects that have gone forward under this alternative contracting method. As a minimum, information on each project will include the following items: project name, location, scope, cost estimate, expenditures to date (broken down by state and federal portions), and status of project (in progress, substantially complete, on hold, etc). Additionally, the report will discuss any industry reaction to this alternative contracting method.
Within 2 months of the conclusion of the second year of the program, VTrans PDD with the assistance of Operations will submit an interim status report to FHWA. This report will include the same (but updated) information required for the initial Report. Additionally, the report will discuss any issues arising from this alternative contracting method with respect to work performance and monitoring, quality, completion time, claims, and other contract administration or legal issues.
Within 4 months of the conclusion of the 3-year program timeframe, VTrans PDD with the assistance of Operations will submit a final evaluation report to FHWA. In a fashion similar to the initial and interim reports, the final report will update and summarize all of the projects that have gone forward under this alternative contracting program as well as any issues that have arisen. Additionally, the report will address each of the concerns and areas of interest as outlined in the "Measures" section of this alternative contracting work plan. Included in the report will be suggestions for improvements, pitfalls to avoid and a recommendation as to further use of this alternative contracting method.
The RFPs for the above mentioned work will include appropriate federal provisions in the likelihood of work under these agreements.
The RFPs will request that the contractors submit rates for each piece of equipment anticipated for that work. The contractor shall only submit rates for the equipment specified. If additional unrelated equipment is included, the unrelated equipment shall be excluded from the agreement.
All overhead including expenses, lodging meals, etc. will be incorporated in the hourly rate.
Contractors will be asked to provide an hourly rate for transporting equipment to and from the work site. Equipment moved to and from the work site for the convenience of the contractor will not be considered for reimbursement.
In RFPs with federal provisions, contractors will be asked to submit two sets of rates - rates for state funded work and rates for work with federal funds.
The contractor will be asked to specify which districts they are available to work in.
The contractor will be allowed to quote different prices for each district in which they wish to work. Depending on the assignments, payment will be based on the rates listed in the contract or a lump sum amount agreed upon by the contractor and the VTrans authorized representative.
The RFP will contain the following evaluation factors to be used by the selection committee in selecting contractors to perform work:
The Contract Administration Section will prepare and process the agreements. The agreements will be processed in accordance with Bulletin 3.5 except that agreements in excess of $3,000,000.00 will need Administration approval. Those agreements having the potential for federally funded work will contain appropriate federal provisions.
Federal-aid projects will require categorical exclusion, utility and right-of-way clearance prior to the commencement of work. Program Development Division will acquire these clearances along with developing an estimate and plans for federal-aid projects only. Note: the right-of-way clearance is not to be used for permanent right-of-way taking. Refer to the Right-of-Way Procedures established and approved by FHWA when questions arise.
Jerry Yakowenko
Office of Program Administration 202-366-1562 E-mail Jerry


text:
Dr. Anthony J. Garcia is accused in four Omaha killings over a period of five years.
Photos: Who were Garcia's alleged victims?UPDATED 2:52 PM CDT Jul 20, 2013
Slideshow Central
CommentsThe views expressed are not those of this site, this station or its affiliated companies. By posting your comments you agree to accept our terms of use. Your comment will not appear here until you verify your email address with Disqus. KETV NewsWatch 7 encourages users to report violations of our terms of use by flagging the inappropriate comment. Hold your mouse over the comment to reveal the flag on the right side, then click the flag.blog comments powered by Disqus


text:
Everyday Edisons Producer & Inventors Digest Publisher, Louis Foreman, Supports Patent ReformPosted: Thursday, Apr 8, 2010 @ 11:50 am | Written by Gene Quinn | Comments Off
Posted in: Gene Quinn, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Reform, Patents
Louis Foreman is the creator, executive producer and lead judge of the Emmy® award-winning PBS reality show Everyday Edisons, which features ordinary people transforming their original ideas into retail products. Foreman is also Chief Executive of Enventys, an integrated product design and engineering firm with offices in Charlotte, NC and Taiwan, as well as the publisher of Inventors Digest, the largest and oldest publication for the inventor community. He is also co-author of The Independent Inventor's Handbook. Foreman is an inventor himself, holding 10 US patents. So it is fair to say that few people know the trials and tribulations of independent inventors better than Louis does, and Louis Foreman supports patent reform.
Earlier today, Foreman sent the letter reproduced below to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), who is Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. It is the Senate Judiciary Committee that has pending before it S. 515 relating to patent reform. As his letter explains, Foreman supports patent reform because "leaving the current system alone is not an option, nor does it benefit anyone." Foreman believes the pending patent reform is a "significant improvement" because, among other things, it will lower fees for micro-entities and because it will "ultimately result in a stronger patent making it easier for independent inventors and small businesses to attract start-up capital."


text:
City Yoga Berlin
| Yoga Classes in Berlin Berlin
|City Yoga Berlin
|Yoga Style: Anusara Yoga
Oranienburger Str. 66
Berlin, Berlin 10117
|+49 30 4404 5900
|Contact:Lutz Versick
Germanys first Anusara Yoga outpost, City Yoga Berlin operates two beautiful studios in the fashionable districts of Prenzlauer Berg and Mitte. Many classes are taught in English, and guest teachers from the US visit regularly. The studio also offers an extensive Anusara Yoga teacher training every year.
|Update listing
|You also might be interested in...
Germany Yoga Workshops
Germany Yoga Retreats
Germany Yoga Advanced Training


text:
Berlin, PA, Aug 08, 2011 -- UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Contact Dawn Knepp (717) 237-2286
Pennwood Farms Showcases USDA Rural Development Funded Methane Digester
Berlin, Pa., August 8, 2011 – USDA Rural Development officials today attended an open house at
Pennwood Farms, featuring a new anaerobic methane digester, funded in part with Rural Development funds.
Manure from the 570 cow dairy farm will be converted into methane gas through anaerobic digestion that
will create 919,475 kWh of electricity per year and will provide a surplus of 553,825 kWh that will be sold back to the utility. Pennwood Farms also received funding from the PA Energy Development Authority for the project.
"Biofuels and other renewable energy sources present an enormous economic opportunity for rural America," said Thomas Williams, USDA Rural Development State Director. "I'm pleased that Rural Development can assist dairy farmers by providing programs that increase energy efficiency on the farm."
Rural Development provides grants and loans through the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP). Funds are available to help agricultural producers and rural small businesses develop renewable energy systems, make energy efficiency improvements and conduct studies to determine the feasibility of renewable energy systems. Under REAP, local businesses receive assistance to deploy wind, solar and other forms of renewable energy.
Through its Rural Development mission area, USDA administers and manages more than 40 housing, business and community infrastructure and facility programs through a network of approximately 110 employees located in 11 offices throughout Pennsylvania. These programs are designed to improve the economic stability of rural communities, businesses, residents, farmers, and ranchers and improve the quality of life in rural America. For more information on programs offered by USDA Rural Development, contact the Pennsylvania State Office at (717) 237-2299 or visit its website at www.rurdev.usda.gov/pa.


text:
The question of what hit the Pentagon leads directly to the question of what happened to the passengers, as Miles Kara was trying to insinuate. That fact was also emphasized by the leading promoter of the "fly-over" theory when he gave a presentation in Europe recently. His presentation ended with the questions he really wanted us to think about.
"Demand answers to the question of what happened to the people on the plane."
"How did they really die?"
"Where they killed them, how they killed them, I can't know."
"I can only know what the witnesses tell me." [12]
Is this a good way to encourage people to question 9/11, and to bring justice? Obviously not.
If one scrolls down to the reference/source for the quote, they'll see that it reads:
[12] Parody video of CIT tour and presentation in which, at 02:18, the speaker tells his French audience the reasons why CIT is working so hard.
So, as his source, Ryan directs the reader to an extremely juvenile, anonymously-created smear video, within which Barrie Zwicker is labeled a "Senile Sellout" for supporting our work.
The link that Ryan provides to this video is now dead. This is convenient for Ryan, because if one actually watches his source video (another copy of which is currently still online here) they will see that there is no indication that the quotes he provides are how "[Craig's] presentation ended". That is because the quotes were NOT from the conclusion of the presentation as Ryan claims, or ANY part of the presentation for that matter.
The quotes are taken from the *Q&A session* that came *after* the presentation. Someone had specifically asked what happened to the passengers and the crew. Craig correctly answered the question, explaining that this is not something that regular citizens have the resources to determine -- unlike the flight path of the plane, which has now been conclusively established via eyewitness testimony, proving that the plane could not have and did not hit the light poles or building, and thus that the passengers of Flight 77 did not die in a plane crash into the Pentagon.
Not only do the out of context clips in Ryan's source video begin after the question has been asked, but they only show a portion of Craig's response. The anonymous video creator edited out the beginning, end, and a portion in the middle (notice the cut around 2:32) before adding his own inaccurate, childish, "parody" subtitles.
A formal response to this question has been published as the #1 Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) on our website CitizenInvestigationTeam.com since the site was launched in mid 2009: "If Flight 77 did not hit the building what happened to its passengers and crew?"
This is a natural question that arises in people's minds after viewing the evidence that we provide conclusively disproving the official impact narrative, and our answer is entirely reasonable.
Similarly, questions like "Who planted all of those demolition devices in the Twin Towers and Building 7?" naturally arise after seeing the evidence that they were brought down in a planned demolition. Ryan can easily understand that neither the simple asking of that question -- nor his inability to conclusively answer it -- in any way refutes the evidence that the buildings were in fact demolished, nor are they grounds for anyone to stop talking about the evidence for demolition. So, it seems to us that he is putting forth a hypocritical non sequitur.
Furthermore, Ryan's assertion that demanding the answer to what really happened to the passengers and crew of Flight 77 is "obviously" not a good way to "bring justice" is based on the false premise that we have not disproven the official impact theory. After all, if we have disproven it, then these people did not die in a plane crash into the Pentagon, in which case why would we not demand to know what happened to them? How is doing so not in accordance with bringing them justice?
We ask Kevin Ryan to discuss these questions with us live on camera; to discuss his premise that Flight 77 might have (or even did) hit the Pentagon with us; and to refute our evidence to the contrary.4. He was intimately involved with the publication and dissemination of "Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon."
Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots from around the world who are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. See the names and credentials of their members here. These pilots analyzed the data released by the NTSB, allegedly from the "black box" of Flight 77, and concluded that it does not support the government's story. [This] paper by Frank Legge is being touted as a "peer-reviewed" paper debunking the analysis and findings of these pilots. [...] Although this new paper concerns the NTSB-released alleged black box data, none of the authors have expertise in avionics at all. Credentialed people at Pilots for 9/11 Truth have already (just like last time) uncovered several errors and demonstrated why the conclusion is based on a faulty premise to begin with. See here for a short explanation by FAA certified pilot Rob Balsamo of some of the errors he noticed right away, and see here for much more thorough analysis and commentary by an actual FDR expert and others.
The paper repeatedly cites Jim Hoffman, including, once again, his 2009 article, "Google Earth Exposes Pentagon Flyover Farce or Critiquing PentaCon (Smoking Crack Version)", which we address here. It also references Chris Sarns and the anonymous "Arabesque".
They concluded:
It is clear that [the "FDR" file provided by the NTSB] supports the official account of the course of flight AA 77 and the consequent impact with the Pentagon. The file thus also supports the majority of eyewitness reports.
It was Ryan himself who disseminated and promoted this paper on 911Blogger upon publication. Furthermore, in the comments section he can be seen weighing in, saying to Jonathan Mark, for example:
...your "truth leaders conference" has spent a considerable amount of time dealing with, and thereby overstating the importance of, the flyover theory
With this paper we hope to see progress on the many unanswered questions about the Pentagon but it is possible that all energies will continue to be consumed with the one (less important, imo) question of "what hit the Pentagon.
5. He and his co-editor Frank Legge were (and may still be) preparing to publish two new articles in the Journal of 9/11 Studies (JO911S) which purport to debunk our work. We have read a draft copy of one, and it is loaded with disinformation, which we can easily refute. (Update: That paper has now already been published on the JO911S "sister site".)
The first paper is by John Wyndham. On the "About Us" page for Scientists for 9/11 Truth, John Wyndham is listed as the groups "Coordinator". Only four other names appear on that page along with him, which are (who else but?) Frank Legge, Kevin Ryan, Steven Jones, and Niels Harrit. Ryan and Legge's JO911S is described as Scientists for 9/11 Truth's "associated website" which "contains the results of peer-reviewed research by our members and others".
Here is an "abstract" for Wyndham's paper posted by Frank Legge on 911Blogger.com (only to be removed a short while later -- screen shot here):
The widespread belief among those who question the official account of 9/11, that a large plane did not hit the Pentagon on 9/11, is unsupported by the evidence. The failure of the 9/11 truth movement to reach consensus on this issue after almost a decade is largely due to a failure to rigorously apply the scientific method to the evidence as a whole. This paper, by so applying the evidence to each proposed theory, shows that a large plane hitting the Pentagon is by far the most plausible theory.
The second paper is written by Legge himself, along with David Chandler. The draft copy of this paper is entitled "The Pentagon Attack on 9/11: A Refutation of the North-of-Citgo Flight Path Hypothesis" (update: now changed to "The Pentagon Attack on 9/11: A Refutation of the Pentagon Flyover Hypothesis Based on Analysis of the Flight Path"). As the title indicates, it purports to refute the north side flight path, and flyover. On 911Blogger.com, Legge stated that the paper:
...provides evidence that the witnesses to the path of the plane approaching the Pentagon, who stated that it passed north of the Citgo service station, must have been mistaken. " The paper concludes that the only plausible description of the approach is that the plane did not deviate round the service station but flew virtually straight and hit the Pentagon, as described by the vast majority of eye witnesses.
Again, we read a draft copy of this paper, and it is loaded with disinformation, which we can easily refute. In fact, we have already refuted much of it already. A number of the claims made in the paper are simply reiterations of previous arguments by Chandler and Legge that we have already addressed at length and demonstrated to be false.
As previously mentioned, the post by Legge from which we are taking these quotes was removed from 911Blogger.com shortly after it was published. This is probably (at least partially) because it made Legge, Chandler, Ryan, and the JO911S look foolish. The context was that he was soliciting reviewers for the paper (and Wyndham's paper as well). In the post, titled "It's time to bite the Pentagon bullet", Legge stated:
There are two papers in need of review for submission to the Journal of 9/11 Studies. [...] As this is a very touchy subject it has proved difficult to locate people who are willing to review these papers. These papers are based on straightforward logic and thus no aviation expertise is required. Aviation expertise would however be helpful in deflecting some types of arguments. This is a call for volunteers to review the papers. If anyone is interested a response would be greatly appreciated. You won't find the papers boring.
However, he wasn't just looking for any old reviewer. He was really just looking for someone to rubber stamp the paper so that they can claim it is "peer reviewed" and thus credible, just like they did last time, and the time before that. It's not surprising that they are having such a hard time finding someone to do this, since most people would not want to ruin their reputation by endorsing such obvious disinformation.
As a matter of fact, they already found one reviewer: Lt. Shelton Lankford. Lankford is a retired Marine pilot who has flown 303 combat missions, and a core member of the research organization Pilots for 9/11 Truth. At their request, Lankford provided a review of the paper to Ryan, Chandler, and Legge, concluding:
This review has, by necessity, only skimmed the surface of the flaws of the paper. To do a comprehensive deconstruction of this document would be akin to attempting a detailed description of the damage, and what would be required to fix, an automobile that had been through a salvage yard compacter.
There is nothing wrong with this paper that a trip through a shredder, and a sincere apology to CIT and the 9/11 Truth community could not cure.
Not only does Legge and Chandler's paper claim to rebut the north side flight path, it also accuses us of "mislead[ing] the public in regard to the witness testimonies" and not presenting them "fairly". We are offering Kevin Ryan, Legge's co-editor, a chance to confront us face to face, expose our supposed dishonesty, defend the thesis of this paper (and the Wyndham paper), and prove that the plane flew on the south side flight path and hit the building as the papers that has been considering publishing claim it did -- not the north side flight path, as reported by the eyewitnesses in the best locations to judge, making it physically impossible for it to have hit the light poles or building, proving that 9/11 was an inside job.
Update: Legge and Chandler's paper has now been published at the website of Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice (STJ911). As you can read on the front page of that site -- right next to STJ911 co-founder Kevin Ryan's picture -- this is the "sister site" of the Journal of 9/11 Studies (see also here). Whether or not Ryan and Legge will also still publish it in the JO911S as originally planned is unknown to us. Regardless, our offer still stands.
I will conclude by saying that I have seen examples of both David Chandler and Jonathan Cole's research into the destruction of the WTC and found it to be excellent, professional, and certainly "scientific". This is what makes it so surprising and disappointing that they would resort to such a sloppy, unprofessional, aggressive, and libelous approach regarding the Pentagon attack, and specifically the findings of CIT. It's particularly disappointing that they would resort to this without bothering to reach out to us even once for a dialogue, or spending much time at all studying our material (assuming that they actually believe the many fallacious things they wrote in this paper).
The content and simplistic nature of their essay leads me to believe that it was most likely written, above all, as a rather emotional and off-the-cuff reaction to false information about Citizen Investigation Team, our work, and the Pentagon attack in general that they have been fed by people like Jim Hoffman and his wife Victoria. I prefer to hold that opinion before writing them off as deliberately dishonest like their apparent mentors on this issue.
I would like to formally challenge both David Chandler and/or Jonathan Cole to debate the issue with me in person and on video. I will come to them on my own dime. I will assume for now that when presented with the information in full, and when all of their questions/concerns are directly addressed, that they will revise their opinions and realize that they have had a hasty a reaction and have severely misjudged the situation here.
If they refuse to debate the subject with me directly, yet also refuse to retract the many untrue and in some cases defamatory things they have said and insist on leaving this extremely inaccurate essay up, I think this will speak very negatively to their honesty, sincerity, honorability, and forthrightness on this issue, especially given their calls for "intellectual rigor" and internal self-"policing" of the movement. Here's hoping that such refusals do not take place. Given the quality and importance of their WTC work and its synergistic nature to the evidence we have uncovered during our Pentagon investigation, we have no desire for the adversarial relationship they have chosen to initiate to continue.
Chandler did not "retract the many untrue and in some cases defamatory" things he had said, and the extremely inaccurate essay that he co-authored remains up on his website and others to this day. Meanwhile, he never accepted this debate invitation, and he also specifically turned down a request by the Rock Creek Free Press to debate us in the pages of that publication.
In fact, in a podcast with Jeff Hill a month after we published our response and issued our invitation, he said this about debating us (mp3):
CHANDLER: I'm not gonna debate people who I feel are gonna be dishonest. Because, I mean-- the only-- I mean, that's just a total waste of time. I will sit down and have a conversation with somebody who's willing to have an open exchange of information, and where there's some sort of an, uh, attempt on all sides to arrive at the truth. So I don't mind having a conversation with people I disagree with. But the kind of strategies they've used, and the types of character assassination they've used.Craig has written about this:
JEFF: (laughs)
CHANDLER: And uh, I mean, these guys are a joke. So, NO I'm not going to perpetuate the discussion with them. I'm sure they will listen to this thing tonight and write me up and all the rest...
JEFF: (laughs)
CHANDLER: But, um, go for it guys. But uh, that's not-- anyway-.
As far as [we] know that is the closest he has come to even publicly acknowledging the existence of our extremely thorough written rebuttal to his attacks against us and my debate challenge, all of which was published 3 1/2 [now almost 7] months ago and sent to him by numerous people, including us. He simply continues to repeat the same disinformation talking points against us that we already rebutted while adding new ones to his repertoire, all while ignoring an opportunity to expose us as the "scum" (his word) that we supposedly are.As we have already explained in the "Kevin Ryan" section, David has now co-authored yet another article about us and our work, this time with Frank Legge, which they were (and possibly still are) planning to publish in the Journal for 9/11 Studies. Not only does the draft copy of the paper (which we got ahold of) claim to refute the north side flight path and flyover, it also ironically accuses us of "mislead[ing] the public in regard to the witness testimonies" and not presenting them "fairly". (Update: They have now published it at STJ911, the "sister site" of Journal for 9/11 Studies.)
His excuse for this is total non-sense, of course. First of all, If that is really his position, I guess he won't be debating NIST, given the opportunity. (Or does he think they are "willing to have an open exchange of information" and will "attempt... to arrive at the truth"?) Secondly, if anyone has engaged in "character assassination" it is him. If launching dishonest, unprovoked attacks in public forums where it is well known that the targets of the attack are forbidden from responding, and then continuing to repeat the same bogus attacks even after the target responds at length, all while steadfastly refusing requests for a debate isn't the M.O. of a character assassin I don't know what is.
We, on the other hand, "had never spoken to David Chandler or Jonathan Cole prior to the publication of their 'joint statement' on the Pentagon attack" and "we had always considered them natural allies, had never badmouthed them or had any inclination to do so, and had even praised their work", as explained in the introduction to our response to their attacks against us. We responded to their attacks in an honest, thorough, and forthright way while offering to debate them directly, and have even maintained that "we have no desire for the adversarial relationship they have chosen to initiate to continue." This is the opposite of the "strategies" of a character assassin.
The title of [Chapter 7] -- "A Consensus Approach to the Pentagon" -- alludes to the widespread sense, both in and outside the 9/11 Truth Community, that, whereas there is a lot of consensus within this community about the destruction of the World Trade Center, there is no such consensus about the attack on the Pentagon. In this chapter, I argue that, although there is indeed much disagreement on the issue that has received the most debate -- Was the Pentagon hit by a Boeing 757? -- this is a relatively trivial point in comparison with an issue about the Pentagon attack on which the 9/11 Truth Movement has reached consensus.As we have meticulously documented for years, the supposed "controversy" ("disagreement") surrounding the evidence we have presented is artificially manufactured by a relatively small faction of dishonest people working in concert in defense of the official impact narrative. This is why our detractors (many of whom are ironically now Griffin's detractors too, and are attempting to create a similar artificial "controversy" around some of his work) typically refuse direct debate with us. The reality is that the idea that a/the large plane impact did not occur at the Pentagon is widely accepted to the point of being near a "consensus" outside of this faction.


text:
All Vampires Are Lesbians |DirectorKaren Shakhnazarov |By Lee Miller (copyright 2013)All vampires are lesbians, more or less.The film opens during present day Moscow with lots of images of three young vampire women. There is woman from Tsarist Russia, Anastasia. There is a Soviet era woman, Natalia. And there is a modern Russian woman, Anna. Casting and costuming may make or vacation this film. There are 200 female vampires earth-wide and 180 are inside Moscow. The capital of Russia seems near remain a Mecca for vampire lesbians. Male vampires are extinct and the females sick of individual walked on and dominated have made a pact not on the way to create male vampires. Creating a male vampire would mean death for any female vampire.
RBK DailyAll Vampires Are LesbiansProducerKaren ShakhnazarovPosted by an1975 535 days ago (http://www.russianfilm.info)
Who Voted for this Story
Pligg is an open source content management system that lets you easily create your own social network.


text:
Deadpool Easter Egg - Deadpool Phones Nolan North: Check out this Easter egg of irreverent Marvel antihero calling his own voice, Nolan North. Consider yourself broken, fourth wall etc.
Future is AOP and PPA Consumer Digital Publisher of the Year.
ComputerAndVideoGames is part of Future plc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. We produce content across five core areas:
© Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath BA1 2BW. All rights reserved. England and Wales company registration number 2008885.


text:
- Antique Jewelry
- The Ages
- Engagement Rings
- Antique Rings
- Diamond Jewelry
- So Much More
Magnificent Georgian Amethyst Earrings
SOLDItem 12019
The art of jewelry is exemplified by the superior mastery of the jewelers of the Georgian age. Like alchemists of old, the artisans of this era turned "simple" materials of amethyst and gold into a magnificent pair of earrings that were possibly part of a larger parure or demi-parure.
Superb amethysts of a deep royal purple have been faceted and foiled to develop even greater depth of color and refraction. Placed in hand crimped collet bezels, the gems have been set closed back with the familiar bulbous or sculptural reverse characteristic of the period. The mounts are of 15k yellow gold with modern 14k gold ear wires.
Measurements: 1-1/2 of an inch (4.4 cm) in length; larger gem is 9/16 of an inch (1.5 cm) in width and smaller gem is 7/16 of an inch (1.1 cm). This pair of antique earrings has a weight of 12.8 grams (8.2 dwt).
Condition: Excellent; later modern 14k gold ear wires.
Date: Circa 1820
Overall Scale: Medium


text:
- 7/6/13 /
- Comment
Movie Review: Edelstein on The Way, Way Back
Steve Carell, Sam Rockwell, and Toni Collette star in this movie by the writers of The Descendants.
Skip to content, or skip to search.
Steve Carell, Sam Rockwell, and Toni Collette star in this movie by the writers of The Descendants.
"People say, 'Take it easy with the f*cking dancing, Rockwell.'"
For George Lucas's daughter.
The actors shot by photographer Andrew Brucker in the eighties and nineties made it big: Also see fetal Kevin Spacey, Marisa Tomei, Winona Ryder...
Called Laggies.
"These are words?" asks Christopher Walken.
Beware the Shih Tzu!
In an ascot, no less.
Who looks nuttier: Farrell or Walken? (Like we even needed to ask.)
He'll join Sam Rockwell and Christopher Walken.
He's unstoppable.
Theroux: "Sam Rockwell is a deadweight. We gotta cut him. We gotta recruit Jeremy Sisto."
Hilary Swank stars in a weepie.
Plus: Matthew Vaughn back in the picture for 'X-Men: First Class.'
Julia Roberts: "My pants are SO tight, come on! I wore these tight pants just for you."
Duncan Jones should probably start working on his Oscar speech now
Ready or not, the actors hit the stage tomorrow at 8 p.m.
Robert De Niro's new movie looks extra heartwarming and extra predictable. Just like Mom likes!
Inspired by Sam Rockwell in 'Moon,' we count down the best performances by actors playing opposite themselves.
"It was weird — a big festival of narcissism for me."
Sam Rockwell plays a lunar-based spaceman who suffers a freak accident and mental breakdown in the final days of his three-year assignment. This looks awesome.
Plus: Snoop does late night.
He'll play Justin Hammer in 'Iron Man 2.' No word on who'll replace him in 'Iron Man 3.'
The director reveals that Sam Rockwell may have had a shot at the role had Robert Downey Jr. not been available. Hm.
Plus: Jenny Lewis inspired by indoor plumbing.


text:
From the moment she appears, Jessica Biel is gracefully deflecting the attention of men. Wearing Roger Vivier white pumps and snug True Religion jeans, her hair tightly pulled back in a ponytail, she walks out of the elevator in the Hotel Gansevoort in New York City's Meatpacking District at a rapid clip, shedding two young men who had the incredible good luck to have ridden down with her. She nods them off nicely as they walk away grinning and no doubt mentally compiling lists of buddies who'll be receiving the following text message: "Dude! I was just in the elevator with the sexiest woman alive!"
Next in the gauntlet is a Moby-looking scenester with a paunch who descends upon her in Ono, the Gansevoort's bustling, dimly lit Japanese restaurant, introducing himself as if he's an old friend. The fact that he's wielding a Treo device like a video camera goes unnoticed by Biel, who later refers to said implication as "creepy." She dispatches him into the darkness with a tight smile and walks through the large restaurant to a back booth, causing a ripple of chopsticks to go still as heads turn.
If the rhythms and rotations of the mass entertainment media complex are to be trusted, we are currently living in Jessica Biel's Big Moment. After getting her foot in the door in 1996 on the show 7th Heaven, the now-25-year-old actress won the hearts and minds of the boys with her badass ability to wield a meat cleaver in the 2003 remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and a bow and arrow in 2004's Blade: Trinity. Her turn in 2005's Stealth, which bombed (literally), may have gone largely unnoticed, but the trailer highlighting Biel under a waterfall certainly didn't. Then in the fall of 2005, Esquire bestowed on her the magazine's "Sexiest Woman" honorific. Last summer, she deftly skipped over the threshold from hottie to respectable actor with her supple performance as an early-twentieth-century duchess opposite Edward Norton and Paul Giamatti in The Illusionist and since then has become a red-carpet flashbulb magnet, wearing Valentino to the Golden Globes and, to present at the Oscars, a fuchsia halter-top Oscar de la Renta dress that strikingly revealed her toned shoulders.


text:
Naval Historical Center
805 Kidder Breese Street SE
Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374-5060
Scope and Content Note
The collection consists of historical materials relating to Boiler Technician Shanks McEachern's naval service. It includes a small amount of personal and business correspondence (1971-1972), an undated newspaper clipping of McEachern's service on the USS Gladiator, and a copy of Welcome Aboard, Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, North Carolina, 1966-1967. The file also contains copies of personnel and transfer forms, travel vouchers, and a commendation relating to his military service.
Preferred Citation
This collection should be cited as the Papers of Shanks McEachern, Operational Archives Branch, Naval Historical Center, Washington, D.C.
Subject Headings (LCSH)
United States. Navy--Boiler Technicians.
Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point (N.C.)
0.25 cubic feet


text:
While Orange County's San Clemente dubs itself the 'Spanish Village by the Sea,' let's take you to San Clemente, Spain, a real Spanish village
Comments are encouraged, but you must follow our User Agreement
Keep it civil and stay on topic. No profanity, vulgarity, racial slurs or personal attacks. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked. By posting your comment, you agree to allow Orange County Register Communications, Inc. the right to republish your name and comment in additional Register publications without any notification or payment.


text: Stevie's Epic Fail: Musicians Ignore Wonder's Florida Boycott Print article Send a Tip by Christian Toto 19 Jul 2013 post a comment Singer Stevie Wonder thrust himself back into the national spotlight Tuesday when he said he wouldn't perform in Florida to protest George Zimmerman's acquittal in the death of Trayvon Martin and the state's "Stand Your Ground" law. The announcement came on the heels of violent protests involving the case, as well as news that the Rev. Al Sharpton would hold up to a 100 rallies across the country Saturday to object to the Martin case verdict. So far, not one major singer has joined Wonder's cause. A good faith Google search found the gospel duo Mary Mary aligning with Wonder, but that appears to be all. Wonder remains a musical legend, but his career isn't as white hot as it once was. Should some of today's top-selling acts join Wonder's boycott, it could have some cultural resonance. At this point, it appears Wonder is alone in his musical protest, despite the entertainment industry's overwhelming anger toward the verdict. Slate.com may be wishing Beyonce, Rihanna or Miley Cyrus join Wonder's cause, but the more time passes, the less likely that will happen.


text:
Wii U 233143 233213
25/07/2013 Reviews
Pikmin 3 - Review
Nintendo has an uncanny talent at taking an established genre and giving it a fresh, accessible spin, and one of the best examples of this skill is Pikmin. Best described as Nintendo's attempt at creating a Real Time Strategy series, it started life over a decade ago on the GameCube, but we've been forced to endure a nine year wait for an all-new instalment. Thankfully, the end result is of such high quality that it's easy to forgive the Japanese veteran for taking its time - in fact, Pikmin 3 is one of the finest releases on the Wii U yet seen.…
15/11/2012 Reviews
Call of Duty: Black Ops II - Review
Is it that time of year already? No, not the annual rush to plaster Christmas all over every shopping centre as soon as the last embers of Bonfire Night have died down, but the traditional November release of a new Call of Duty game. Turning out a new title in a series every twelve months should lead to creative inertia but against the odds, in Black Ops II developer Treyarch has delivered the most invigorated and interesting COD in years.…


text:
Snow can cause a mess when coming indoors from outside, use heavy duty trapmats and save on cleaning time and effort.
With the weather as it is, it isn't just building sites that are affected but pavements and paths can soon turn into a sludgy mess. When walking into your house the last thing you need is a mess on your floor, especially carpets and buildings such as hotels can suffer with lobbies and entrances taking the brunt of the damage . A great way po combat this and save a lot of cleaning time are our heavy duty dirt trapper mats. Unlike standard trapmats, which don't stand up against water and particualry wet, muddy or snowy boots, due to their vinyl type surface, Protec's heavy duty trapmats are made of a fabric material and a reinforced banding around the edges. This means they are far better at absorbing moisture and are a much better option in particularly wet weather.
In areas that there is particularly high foot traffic it may be worth looking at some additional floor protection to safeguard against wet, muddy and dirty shoes. We supply a range of materials that work brilliantly in this application including self adhesive carpet protector which is specifically for protecting carpets.
If your floors are suffering in the winter months, or at any point in the year for that matter, then contact Protec for advice on temporary protection materials for your floors on 0800 834 704.


text:
5 Stocks Poised to Pop on Positive Earnings
OmniVision Technologies
My first earnings short-squeeze play today is semiconductor player OmniVision Technologies (OVTI), which is set to release its numbers on Thursday after the market close. This company designs, develops and markets semiconductor image-sensor devices. Wall Street analysts, on average, expect OmniVision Technologies to report revenue of $205.34 million on earnings of 22 cents per share.
If you're looking for a beaten-down heavily shorted technology stock ahead of its earnings report this week, then make sure to take a hard look at shares of OmniVision Technologies. This stock has dropped notably from its April high of $21.11 to its closing price on Tuesday of $15.40 a share. That slide has pushed shares of OmniVision Technologies into oversold territory since its relative strength index reading has dipped around 30 to 40 for the last couple of weeks.The current short interest as a percentage of the float OmniVision Technologies is rather high at 15.8%. That means that out of the 46.47 million shares in the tradable float, 8.18 million shares are sold short by the bears. This is a low float and high short-interest situation, so if the company can report bullish earnings and forward guidance, then we could easily see a sizable short squeeze post-earnings. >>10 Stocks Poised to Rise in Apple's Wake From a technical perspective, OVTI is currently trading below both its 50-day and 200-day moving averages, which is bearish. This stock has been downtrending since April, with shares falling from $21.11 to a recent low of $14.02 a share. During that downtrend, shares of OVTI have consistently made lower highs and lower lows, which is bearish technical price action. That said, on Monday OVTI closed up 8.5% to $15.40 on heavy volume. If you're in the bull camp on OVTI, I would wait until after its report and look for long-biased trades if this stock can manage to break out above some near-term overhead resistance at $15.72, and then its 200-day moving average of $16.26 a share with high-volume. Look for volume on that move that registers near or above its three-month average action of 2,591,920 shares. If we get that action, I would then add to any long positions once OVTI takes out its 50-day moving average of $18.16 a share with high-volume. Target a run toward $20 to $21 a share or possibly higher if the bulls spark a big short-squeeze post-earnings. I would simply avoid OVTI or look for short-biased trades if after earnings this stock fails to trade back above its 50-day moving average at $16.26, and then drops below some near-term support at $14.02 a share with heavy volume. If we get that move, then look for OVTI to drop significantly down towards $12 to $11 a share if the bears hammer this down post-earnings.
Select the service that is right for you!COMPARE ALL SERVICES
Action Alerts PLUSTry it NOW
Jim Cramer and Stephanie Link actively manage a real portfolio and reveal their money management tactics while giving advanced notice before every trade.
Product Features:
- $2.5+ million portfolio
- Large-cap and dividend focus
- Intraday trade alerts from Cramer
- Weekly roundups
TheStreet Quant RatingsTry it NOW
Only $49.95/yr
Access the tool that DOMINATES the Russell 2000 and the S&P 500.
Product Features:
- Buy, hold, or sell recommendations for over 4,300 stocks
- Unlimited research reports on your favorite stocks
- A custom stock screener
- Upgrade/downgrade alerts
Stocks Under $10Try it NOW
David Peltier, uncovers low dollar stocks with extraordinary upside potential that are flying under Wall Street's radar.
Product Features:
- Model portfolio
- Stocks trading below $10
- Intraday trade alerts
- Weekly roundups
Dividend Stock AdvisorTry it NOW
Jim Cramer's protege, David Peltier, identifies the best of breed dividend stocks that will pay a reliable AND significant income stream.
Product Features:
- Diversified model portfolio of dividend stocks
- Alerts when market news affect the portfolio
- Bi-weekly updates with exact steps to take - BUY, HOLD, SELL
Real Money ProTry it NOW
All of Real Money, plus 15 more of Wall Street's sharpest minds delivering actionable trading ideas, a comprehensive look at the market, and fundamental and technical analysis.
Product Features:
- Real Money + Doug Kass Plus 15 more Wall Street Pros
- Intraday commentary & news
- Ultra-actionable trading ideas
Options ProfitsTry it NOW
Our options trading pros provide daily market commentary and over 100 monthly option trading ideas and strategies to help you become a well-seasoned trader.
Product Features:
- 100+ monthly options trading ideas
- Actionable options commentary & news
- Real-time trading community
- Options TV