text: 21st Century Light Space Modulator: an installation by Jason Bruges Studio Date 10am - 5pm*OPENING HOURS NOTICE*Please note that the exhibition will be opening at the later time of 11.30am on Thursday 24 January. It will close at 5pm, as usual. In summer 2012 Jason Bruges Studio transformed an unloved public space on London's Southbank with a landmark design commissioned by Havells Sylvania, the lighting arm of India's largest lighting and electrical manufacturer, and the Southbank Centre. For this installation at the RIBA Jason Bruges Studio opens up the design process to reveal the Studio's approach on the site - fusing technology and culture to bring the space to life through interactivity and playfulness using a variety of materials, colours, light effects and sensing technology. The 21st Century Light Space Modulator pays homage to the dynamic, theatrical light props created by Laszlo Moholy-Nagy at the Bauhaus in 1930. The spectacular results are a series of evolving urban interventions that react instinctively to their location, choreographed by activity and motion from the surrounding environment. In bringing the installation to RIBA Jason Bruges Studio and Havells Sylvania are able to reflect on the process of creating the 21st Century Light Space Modulator, and show the impact that an urban spectacle can have on generating positive conversations and uplifting the built environment in unexpected and surprising ways. Associated talk21st Century Light Space Modulator: an introduction by Jason Bruges StudioTuesday 27 November, 6.30pm As part of November's Last Tuesday 'Colour' themed evening, Jason Bruges Studio leads a special talk within the exhibition, providing an insight into the ideas behind this dynamic and sensory installation.Fees:Free admissionBooking:Contact:Admission to all RIBA exhibitions is free.Please note, galleries may be closed early for special events. Call +44 (0)20 7307 3699 to check opening times. Organiser:Sponsors:Havells Sylvania 21st Century Light Space Modulator, 2012 (Jason Bruges Studio)


text:
I have always believed that IT is an engine of an efficient economy; it can also drive a greener one.
Michael Dell, Forbes Magazine Nov 2009
Greenpeace launched the Cool IT Challenge in 2009 to call on Information Technology (IT) companies to power technological solutions needed to fight climate change.
In 2008, The Climate Group and the Global e-Sustainability Initiative (GeSI) issued a report, called SMART 2020: enabling the low carbon economy in the information age, which showed how the IT sector can reduce economy-wide global emissions of up to 15 percent by 2020.
Read our factsheet or head over to the leaderboard to learn more about the Cool IT Challenge.
Few would doubt that climate change exists and that it is man-made. Why then is Big Oil allowed to steal the show at one of the Arctic's most important events?
This week scientists, NGOs and ministers from as far away from...
In this world where we seem surrounded by news of gloom and doom, we don't often hear stories of positive change.
But here is one: a story of a village that has unshackled itself from darkness, after 30 years of having its energy...
The "irreversible collapse" of glaciers in Antarctica is dominating headlines around the world this week. News outlets are breathlessly reporting that the dramatic rise in sea levels that's now on the cards. So what does it mean?
Earlier this month, the world's top climate scientists reiterated that we are on a path to permanently change our planet, reporting that people on every continent are already feeling the impacts of global warming. If we are to preserve...
1 - 4 of 95 results.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
West African cooking quite often uses the mixture of chiles and peanuts, which are called groundnuts there. This unusual soup uses peanut butter as the peanut source and is one that you can have it on the table in under an hour. Don't eliminate mixing the peanut butter with a little of the soup before adding to the pot, or the mixture may curdle.
One of the most basic Chiltepin dishes known, this recipe is prepared only in the state of Sinaloa, where the Chiltepins produce fruits all year long. This simple soup is served in mountain villages, and everyone makes his own in a soup bowl.
Poke, pronounced (POH-kay) is the Hawaii version of Japanese sashimi and differs in that it is chopped, not sliced, and is highly seasoned.. Serve this appetizer over romaine lettuce.
This South American paste can be used as a substitute whenever fresh chiles are called for. It will keep for two weeks or more in the refrigerator; for longer storage, increase the vinegar and reduce the amount of olive oil. For a red paste, substitute 15 dried New Mexican red chiles, soaked in water. For a green paste, substitute 10 New Mexican green chiles, roasted, peeled, and chopped. For a much hotter paste, add 5 habanero chiles. All chiles should have the seeds and stems removed.
These meatballs fall into a class of tapas called "cosas de picar." Named after the picks that the picadors use during a bull fight, the term refers to those tapas that are served with toothpicks. In Spain, they would be made with minced meat, but since ground meats are more readily available, I use a combination of ground pork and beef. Traditionally these are made with paprika, but since I like my foods a little more spicy, I also add ground cayenne.
Originally published in the Alice Bay Cookbook by Julie Wilkinson Rousseau, this recipe is a favorite with Alaska fishermen. It offers a simple and delicious way to serve salmon at a backyard barbecue.
Rick Browne, Ph.B., host of the PBS show "Barbecue America" and the author of The Best Barbecue on Earth and nine other books, is supplying articles and recipes to the Fiery Foods & Barbecue SuperSite.
There's nothing like a spiced cider to get you ready to beg for candy. If you can find hard cider, you can eliminate the brandy here; if not, use non-alcoholic cider plus the brandy. Serve with a cinnamon stick in each cup if you want.


text:
Main Content
Sanuk's Hemp Sidewalk Surfers are made from, you guessed it, 100% organic hemp. You might be skeptical and think that these sandals won't be comfortable — after all, wasn't hemp used to make ropes way back in the day? You couldn't be more wrong. The all-natural hemp upper is attached to a super soft, molded EVA footbed that's just begging to cradle your feet. Don't be afraid to wear them all day, every day; the eco-friendly AEGIS microbe shield will protect against odor, stains and deterioration. Heck, they're even suitable for vegetarians and vegans to wear! Rocking these sandals is like giving Mother Earth a big ol' hug. When's the last time you hugged your mother?
- AEGIS antimicrobial additive
- Contrasting poncho textile liner
- Happy U outsole
- Imported
- Organic hemp upper with frayed edge detail
- Suitable wear for Vegans and Vegetarians
- Super soft, high rebound, molded EVA footbed
Sanuk Customers also liked:
Special event items are produced by manufacturers only after the outcome of a game or event. These are advanced sale items and will ship immediately after they are received in our warehouse.
Manufacturer direct items are shipped directly from the manufacturer. These items are not available for international or expedited shipping.
Customized items can be personalized with options such as your name, your favorite number, and/or designs. Some options may be limited by league rules.


text:
- Joanne Donovan
- Auckland
- New Zealand
This conversation is closed.
What are human rights? How do we decide and are they universal?
Are human rights the starting point we begin with when looking at how our societies function, or are there more important issues? How true is this statement; 'when people focus on being ethical without being pragmatic they end up being neither.'
Closing Statement from Joanne Donovan
Thanks to everyone who participated in this conversation. Some excellent threads. All the best to you and your families for the new year 2012. Peace.
Dec 21 2011: I wonder if it might be clearer and simpler to think in terms of responsibilities rather than rights.
Universal responsibility can be simply stated: Every human being is responsible to live in a way that does not cause lasting harm to people or our planet.
Thinking in terms of rights seems to put us in individual frames of reference. People whose rights are not diminished seem to have difficulty expanding their frame to include others they do not know or understand. Modern culture tries to overfill our frames and crowd out perceptions of distant people may be suffering.
Thinking in terms of responsibility creates an "us" frame of reference since the effects of our actions extend well beyond the context of our individual lives.
Dec 21 2011: Bob: The idea that "every human being is responsible to live in a way that does not cause lasting harm to people or our planet" is very appealing.
But then every time I take a long airplane trip I think "man am I exceeding my harm limit". How can your principle be put into practice considering cases like this?
Dec 21 2011: Hi Tim,
The very fact that you ask the question "am I exceeding my harm limit" is a first step in putting the concept of universal responsibility into practice. The world can become a much better place to the extent we all ask, and then answer such questions. Working out clear and simple ways to calculate our carbon footprints keeps us from stepping on other's health and the sustainability of our planet.
Imagine apps and websites that tracked the carbon footprint of every person, organization, business and corporation. Imagine Accounting systems that track and audit environmental and human costs Imagine economic, educational, and political systems that supported and reinforced the concept of universal responsibility.
The concept of "rights" tends to be fragmented with much debate and disagreement over which or whose rights are more important. Universal responsibility is much simpler and clearer and can serve as a driving principle for developing systems and structures that serve humanity and sustain our planet.Dec 22 2011: Tim,
I once saw some unnamed activist on John Stewart, and when Stewart confronted him with the fact that he had flown from Australia, the activist responded, ( to paraphrase) "before I boarded the plane I had planted x amount of trees, which more than offset the pollution engendered by my fraction of the population aboard."
I am not saying this would always work, but the idea of unrelated balance may be applicable in some of these situations.
Tim Colgan
Dec 22 2011: Humans are so adept at rationalization, aren't they?Dec 22 2011: This is very interesting idea. However what do you consider to fall in category of lasting harm and why only lasting?
- +2
Harm seem to refer only to physical world? What about concepts such as freedom of choice or expression?
Dec 23 2011: Zdenek Smith wrote "Harm seem to refer only to physical world? What about concepts such as freedom of choice or expression?"
I would define lasting harm as that which prevents a person or community maintaining health and attaining their full potential.
I recognize that our current educational, economic and political systems cause lasting harm under this definition, which is why I believe one of the most important things we can do at this time in history is to explore designs for systems that support and reinforce sustainability, health and personal development.Dec 19 2011: Mr.Francis -
I prefer to say in other way :
The devil whom all of us are afraid of it - lives in us.
we`d better know him instead of denying him.
Thanks for your attention.
Comment deleted
Dec 19 2011: Pierre -
You pointed out a complicated phenomenon which I didn`t understand and define to myself yet : Love.
I think your meaning is some phenomena like a mother`s love or a soldier`s sacrifying for saving other soldier`s life or such things ............
I have a justificatin for these happenings but maybe you don`t accept it ..........
In one of the TED talks (paul zak : oxytocin) mr.Zak did a research about some feelings like trusting depend to some chemical materials ,etc.
in this link : http://www.livescience.com/1955-love-hormone-improves-mother-child-bond.html
scientists claimed that a mother`s love is because of this hormone (oxytocin).
I accept that it can`t justify anything but ..........
see : imagine you`re a soldier. you have two choices :
1- sacrifiying yourself to saving other`s life.
2- remaining in your shelter - seeing your friends` dying and feeling regret and uselessness for rest of life.
In cases that soldiers are faithless to their mission we see the second happen , otherwise the first one.
you see it`s still a trade : feeling uselessness and disgusting for rest of life or dying.
I think other situations are the same.
maybe some reactions seem loss in that trade to you - but you`re not the judge !
surely values are different to that trader .
Romeo killed himself because he thought he will suffer a lot in his life without Julliet so dying is better.
maybe you call it loss but he didn`t !
I hope I told my meaning well enough.Dec 20 2011: Pierre ...
I think you used to asking hard questions ...
Ok - in this situation we investigate the trade :
It demands to your value and the value of life to me.
If your value seems more to me - and if I don't sacrifice myself for you- I destroyed the holly saint that I made from myself in my mind !
I'll have a painful and regretful life with no hope.
I can't love any other - because I know I'll betray to them because of myself.I will live such a zombie !
Surely It's hard to decision, but it's a deal !
Choices aren't always between two goods.
May you should choose between losing more or less.
And if you are one of my close friends - I'll make an insult to the world (!) and do sacrifice.
And psychologically it's more possible when humans are young- because life's value increases by the age ...
By the way - what's your conclusion about it ?
Kathy Castle
Dec 16 2011: The issue with globalized ethics is that in our attempt to impose an ethic that applies across the globe, the dominant global perspective..that which wields the most "power" tends to be what we expect others to adopt--resulting in a colonial ethic that doesn't reflect or suit the local contexts in a way that can facilitate discussions globally. What we need is a commitment to true dialogic communication--- a commitment to valuing both the SELF and the OTHER equally--and a commitment to seeking out difference and allowing ourselves and our conception of the world to be truly shaped by that difference. We must allow meaning to emerge out of respect for viewpoints--whether we agree or not is less important than our willingness to remain open to personal and collective transformation.
- +2
Too often we strive so hard to find common ground, we force it, and lose the beauty of the diversity that should comprise our perspective. We look for ways to come together at the expense of growing from the differences between and among us together. We share a responsibility for the creation of this type of world. I write about these kinds of issues here, for anyone interested in exploring my blog-- http://kathy-momphd.blogspot.com/2011/10/our-responsibility.html
Dec 17 2011: Much of what you say make perfect sense. Thanks for the link to your blog, I will pay it a visit. So Kathy, in your opinion their are no human rights or ethics which are universal?
Paul Lillebo
Dec 19 2011: Kathy,
- +1
Good note (meaning I agree with most of it). The feverish urge to spread a democracy-engendered platform of "Human rights" around the world smacks of philosophical colonialism, akin to the west's religious missionary effort that unfortunately is still attempting to get the "3rd world" to see God our way. We might do better by letting "rights" find their own way.
But I'll add a couple of quibbles. (That's what communication is about, isn't it?) You say that "What we need is . . . a commitment to valuing both the SELF and the OTHER equally."
Perhaps you don't mean this quite literally, because in most contexts this must be biologically impossible. Humans, like all species, are equipped with a very strong sense of self-preservation, which makes "no.1" number one. "Love your neighbor as yourself," was a wish by a famous dreamer, but has no bearing on reality. It's just not possible to value your mother equally with other people's mothers (she wouldn't like it one bit), or yourself equally with other people. This would be destructive of family and group loyalties, and would undercut trust and in the end social organization. What is possible is being fair to other people, to take time to learn to understand their viewpoint, and I think that's all one can demand.
By the bye, I note (from your profile) that you have high hopes for the "power of communication to shape reality." I agree fully, but think it's important to stress the danger that lies in this power. Great skill at shaping reality through mastery of communication was shown by A.Hitler, B.Mussolini, and Rev. Jim Jones, among many others of their ilk. Politicians, trial lawyers, evangelists, "yellow journalism" and salesmen use skill at communication, specifically tailored to shape the reality they wish to construct. Communication is, in a sense, morally neutral; it is its aims and methods, its degree of honesty and relation to facts and truth, that place it in each case somewhere on a good-evil axis.
Dec 21 2011: Paul - It does seem that philosophical colonialism is prevalent today. The promotion of sexual equality in Afghanistan is a case in point. Obviously, our hope for humanity is the equality of the sexes. But I've heard several interviews from people on the ground in Afghanistan that without promoting economic development there will be no equality. So, for example, it might behove a poverty stricken woman to invest more in the education of her sons in order to advance the family economically. Is it the role of the "developed world" to tell them this is the wrong approach?
Dec 24 2011: Colonialism is littered with tragic stories of one culture seeking to 'enlighten' another only to destroy its very fabric, creating unhappiness and disenfranchisement.
So perhaps as Kathy has put so well, we can extrapolate from that, 'human rights' can be contextual rather than absolute. Are there any Tim, which we can describe as universal?
Ian Young
Dec 20 2011: Kathy, and others in this thread...
- +1
I can only agree that the extrinsic rights conferred by the risen powers of the west are colonial in nature, but is that all bad?Jimmy Carter demand that the El Salvadoran government cease slaughtering thier own indigenous population or he would cut of thier finacial aid. William Wilberforces imposition of a very christian repulsion to slavery drove England to declare slavery on the high seas illegal, and thus enforced, cripple and eventually almost destroy that millenial old institution.
A few examples that I think should be considered in any conversation that casts rights into a un-culturizing or relativistic roles, faith leaders teaching that inoculations carry disease, divorce by incineration in the Punjab,clitorectomies, gang rape as punishment for the female adultry among the Chimpayu and to many others, the exucution of homosexuals in Uganda, the degredation of the female gender across entire hemisheres.I know that no one here endorses this kind of brutality.
Mazlov's pyramid of hierarchical needs teaches us that the man at the bottom, with nothing, cannot worry about the ethics of feeding his kids, only the practicalities. Those at the top have the luxury of analysis and theory. If we truely believe that an educated and free society is better, are we not, by virtue of our wealth and power, obligated to offer those advantages to each individual? That means every girl in Afganistan is offerd an opportunity to read. The reading matter, well that should be up to her, but the ability to do so... can we in good conciense refuse to act?
I challenge, go read the Univerasal Declaration of Human Rights and find one of the 30 primary articles that you have a right to refuse any living person. And are any of them examples of seeking to oppress cultural differences? These are the human rights the "west" is trying to impose. I personally think it is for the better, and once thus empowered those now oppresed might agree.
Kathy Castle
Dec 20 2011: Hello Ian,
- +1
Thanks for your thoughts. I appreciate your concern with accepting relativistic views on ethics...I share that concern as well. I am not promoting relativism as a viable approach to ethics. There is a right and there is a wrong--I'm just saying that it, in my view, it is nonsensical for one culture to impose their view of right on another without being informed and open to alternative viewpoints on seeing the world. There is a major difference between saying "to each their own" and that anything can be justified and saying that we need to work, and work hard, at being open to differing perspectives as we negotiate a common understanding of what is right and wrong. Imposing one cultural view on global society is, in my view, egocentric and superior, and inhibits meaningful communication across cultures.
The examples you cite are not limited to countries outside the westernized world. Much of what is considered normal in this part of the globe would be considered atrocious and morally wrong in another part of the world. The extreme sexualization of women and young girls comes to mind first--though certainly is not the only morally corrupt part of westernized culture. My point here is that no culture is without its ethical or moral problems, so to say one culture can and should impose their perspective on another without being truly informed by those cultures with whom they share the global stage is, in my view, short-sighted.
It's essential that we do define clear ethical standards that are not relativistic in nature. The process, though, is complex, difficult work. I would argue that one must first recognize and publicly claim the limitations of one's own perspective and positionality and articulate how this inherent bias necessitates a dependence on alternative, often conflicting viewpoints to enable a meaningful discussion aimed at gaining a more complete understanding of the world.Dec 21 2011: England's motivation in passing the Wilberforce anti-slave trading act in 1807 may have been as high-minded as you suggest (based on a "christian repulsion to slavery"), but other motives may also have crept in. As the British well knew, the U.S. constitution, in force from 1789, forbade the Congress from interfering with the slave trade for 20 years. By 1805 it was clear that the Congress would ban importation of slaves on the very first day they could do so under the constitution, i.e., January 1, 1808. On March 3, 1807, President Jefferson signed the law that made this ban effective. This changed the economics of slave trading, and three weeks later the British Parliament duly passed Wilberforce's slave trading ban.Dec 21 2011: Good point Kathy. It does seem that "universal human rights" tend to have parochial interpretations (something like "common sense" being very culturally based). In reading up on this topic, the wikipedia entry on the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" points out that several Islamic countries objected to the wording.Dec 22 2011: I think we need to carefully separate the concept of universal rights, that apply to all people regardless of which religion or culture they were born into, from diversity through culture as art, dance, music and celebration.
I always see people to claim that rules that go against universal human rights but are endorsed by local culture or religion are rules that need to be respected. I think that is wrong.
Why? People are born free from any ideologies or rules. The only needs they truly all have and share are embodied in universal rights and freedoms esp. the right to make own choices and right for freedom and equality.
Some cultures and religions goes against those basic needs, typically making women less equal and oppressed and non-believers subject to limited freedom and speech.
If I am born in a certain country I don't think anyone has the right to impose local cultures and religions on me. Many of customs are dated centuries and were introduced either as necessity to deal with harsh life or to gain power by leaders of the community.
cheersDec 15 2011: I think that Humanity already knows what Human Rights are. They are built into our DNA, and they are universal.
Human Rights could be a good starting point for re-designing society: start with the basics, health, love, family, joy, and work from there.
When people focus on being ethical, they are being pragmatic. Whomever said the statement above "they end up being neither" must have been feeling cynical. When people act in ethical ways, the rest falls into place. You can "take that to the bank"...but it's too bad we need banks.
Dec 15 2011: I am inclined to agree, and this is actually what I hope to explore. What is innate to us? We are essentially a hairless ape with a big fatty brain. Like all other apes we prefer to live in troops and work to cooperate with the other chimps in the troop upon which our survival depends. Perhaps the problem with many of our societies today is that we think we are not an ape afterall but something else, and consequently our troop is of no importance, only we as individuals are.
Are concepts of human rights an extension of what is natural for us? To care for the people in direct proximity? What do you think Thomas.
Dec 19 2011: I think that is an excellent way to describe human rights. "an extension of what is natural" and "to care for people in direct proximity"...the trick is for Humanity to understand that from here-on-out, all 7,000,000,000 of us are in direct proximity with each other.
Dec 19 2011: I agree Thomas, lets keep spreading the word!
Joe Medina
Dec 16 2011: Well said sir. I agree with everything except for the ethical part in: "When people act in ethical ways, the rest falls into place."
- +1
Perhaps you meant to use the word moral instead?
Dec 19 2011: "Moral" would be a better vocabulary word; however, I try not to use the word "moral", because throughout my life I have noticed that "morality" is associated typically with religion or sex. It seems that "morals" are imposed upon others. I do not like imposing anything upon others, other than making them stop hurting others.
On the other hand, a child can learn to be virtuous, or shaped to be ethical, and there are "ethics courses" in colleges...
Is it possible for a person to be ethical, or is the word ethical only used for groups?
Thank you!Dec 18 2011: Thomas - I take it you feel that it is cynical to believe that all behavior is motivated by self interest. One definition of cynical is "distrusting or disparaging the motives of others."
If one trusts that people act out of self interest and don't disparage this fact, are they being cynical?Dec 27 2011: Well,
When individuals do things we find abhorrent, we take away their rights! But, there are no rights!
I still think so-called human rights should be looked at as needs. We all have needs and the most important ones, off the top of my head, are the same for everyone on the planet. These are needs our environment has to supply or we die, or live lives of constant struggle, slavery, poverty, and worse, if we don't die. Education. Some say it isn't a right, but it is a need, whatever that education may be.
I agree with this David Hamilton about having the right to kill. The real power of life is that one can do whatever one wants. And I do not believe there is such a thing as karma. People will try and exact karma upon you, that is true. But an existing power called karma, I don't believe in. Many, hundreds, even thousands, perhaps millions of people have done things to others and never been caught, accused, suspected, or stopped. They died without ever being held accountable for what they may have done. And, likewise, I don't believe there is a judgment after we die, the wishful-crutch many cling to concerning people who did "bad things" and got away with it.
Until we have something like "Universal Needs Are Rights FOR Everyone", we will never have common ground for change, discussion or even working together. We will always only have platforms for arguing, resisting, fighting and war.
I mean, why are so many people so fucking afraid of humans having rights? What is wrong with you people?
I don't get it. Without our same-universal-needs being made into universal rights, those of you who are still young, will more than likely re-think your thoughts about having the right to kill when the way the world is going puts you into a kill mode to survive. The entire thing is rigged to make you fight with one another for survival. So many believe we are a higher animal but continue to support an "unspoken right" that we live like wild ones, fighting each other to live.Dec 23 2011: Human rights are something we all have the power to give not the right to take. When one takes, it is usually with conflict, one we give we give with the power to make change.Dec 21 2011: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights appeared and had the possibility of existing only in relatively recent times. Before the 20th century people discussed only the rights of different groups. The Bill of Rights of England, the Bill of Rights in the United States, and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in France are not the forms of universal human rights. They have constituted mostly the limited political and legal agreements within specific political circumstances without constituting of universal human rights.
Neither the Greeks nor the Romans had any concept of universal human rights; slavery, for instance, was justified both in ancient and modern times. The impulses which led to creation of the concept of universal human rights occurred in 20th century during a time which is known to us as democratic. Within the democracy not only the philosophers, but all people became able to accept a thinking concerning the question of what the human being is, and about the meaning of this in a universal sense.Dec 19 2011: Hi Mr. Colgan! nice to meet you on this forum!
I would use the definition of cynical as "distrustful of human sincerity or integrity" or better yet "bitterly or sneeringly distrustful, contemptuous, or pessimistic" with pessimistic being the better word of all. Maybe I should have used the word "pessimistic" instead of "cynical"...oops...
I think Humanity needs to find a balance between "The Narcissistic Self-Indulgent Individual" and the "Borg Collective" I will have to look up the definition of disparage, but if one acts out of self interest, without consideration of others, they may have some cynicism...
Thank you for asking, I really need to practice thinking and writing, Mr. Medina above helped me understand the difference between "ethic" and "moral".
Dec 21 2011: Hi Thomas. I'm about to passionately address you as if I were controlled by a need to be right. But don't take it personally. As you say I also need practice thinking and writing. Plus, debate is just such good fun!
OK. So if we trust that humans are sincerely concerned with their self interest (and by extension, THEIR family's interest and THEIR community's interest) and have the integrity to admit it, then are they cynical?
And if they are optimistic that if everyone honestly concerns themselves with this self interest that the world in general will benefit, then where is the negativity in this viewpoint?
Dec 21 2011: Yes....no....maybe...wait....I'm confused. Humans that are concerned with their self-interest (and by extension their family's interest, and their community interest) and have the integrity to admit it, then they are the good guys.
People who act in their own self-interest with-out consideration of others may be cynical...
If people are optimistic that the above viewpoint will benefit the world in general, then there is no negativity.
I disagree with the statement that "if people focus on being ethical without being pragmatic they end up being neither" Vocabulary definition aside, It seems that if people focus on being ethical, that is being pragmatic as well. (I know I am right about this...;)
But alas, if someone with bad ethics think they have good ethics, then I just changed the whole subject didn't I ? (do I win this debate yet) (I really need to be right about this, or my daughter will laugh at me.)Dec 17 2011: Human rights is in my opinion one of the most disagreed topics in world politics at the moment and one of the trickiest yet unescapable issues imaginable.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (by UN, 1948) says in it's first article: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood." The Declaration has been critiqued to be a "declaration of western values" for example when it comes to equality of men and women in muslim countries or child labour in South East Asia or Africa etc. In my opinion it is cultural relativism to, for example, claim unequal power relations between sexes acceptable just because that is how it has always been in that particular culture or religion. That something has been some way doesn't mean it should be or that it's acceptable in any way. In my opinion religions with their usually quite strict ethical and moral teachings have blinded people of the ethics of just being a human. If we strip human kind off of cultures and religions, we're all pretty much the same. If you know the basics of global political economy and it's history, you will understand the power relations of today's world a lot better. It's very important to question these things and to ask yourself who benefits of this kind of a world order, who tells us what is ethical and what is not and how do we know our ethics are better than someone else's?
I believe in human capacity of compassion, empathy and caring. I believe we are all the same, all equal and all worthy of other people's respect. Cultures, religion, power relations, a divided world with nation-states and their nuclear weaponry has ripped our human kind apart and caused a great deal of suffering. So for me human rights really means a right to be a human, to be free to make one's choices and live one's life without constant fear and oppression and it's a human duty to help everyone have that.
Dec 17 2011: you nailed it Emma, thanks for your wonderful comment.Dec 16 2011: Hi Joanne, as usual great topic for a debate.
Regarding human rights, I have seen that there seems to be consensus on most areas, and some divergences in a few. Right to property is one that usually causes sparks, as we have discussed at great lengths in other ted debates.
I think that the issue is not in the definition of what human rights are but, as your question hints, in their implementation.
First, my bias: I think that the very basic point must be to agree that we are human beings, who share the same basic needs: food, water, shelter, non-hostile human contact. Another point we must agree is that we are social animals more than hermit crabs. If we cannot agree on these two, there is bound to be problems agreeing down the road.
Now, we can build on top of that, always keeping these basic human needs in the back of our minds as our guide.
Being familiar with John Locke's unalienable rights, or the U.S. declaration of independence, and even after reading the International Bill of rights (http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet2Rev.1en.pdf), it appears that the same topics are repeated over and over: life, liberty, property, no slavery, no discrimination, privacy, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of expression, etc.
They all make great sense. I like them all.
If the world population was 100 and there were 1000 acres of productive land, plenty of sunshine and a river accessible to all 100, it would be quite easy to grant most (maybe even all) of these rights to everybody.
But what if the population was 100,000? Human interaction almost ensures that there will be conflict when trying to satisfy all human rights for all individuals.
Such being the reality we live on, I think that not all rights are born equal, some rights are more right than others, I think we should prioritize them and use the prioritization whenever conflict arises between them.
Ethics should give us destination, pragmatism should build the path to it
Dec 17 2011: I am out of my weekly ration of thumbs up for you Andres, but what a great response. I think your remark; 'Ethics should give us destination, pragmatism should build the path to it' arrives at the point.
I am interested in exploring whether or not you think that a concept of human rights is innate to us as social creatures, as Thomas seems to think, or whether it is a social construct, a political trade off, as Amirpouya suggests.
I agree with you that as soon as competition for resources comes into play, conflict results. Are we naturally inclined to follow a system of ethics as regards our fellow man, or is it imposed on us?
I believe there are studies which show the number of people who shoot to kill iin times of war, is fairly low and that it has been shown that most people shoot to miss about eighty percent of the time. In fact, it is quite difficult to train a person to kill, which is why most armed forces basic training is so harsh and dehumanasing.
When Hitler trained certain personel among his SS to man the death camps, a careful screening programme was put in place. Young SS were recruited to work in the medical facilities he used to wipe out the mentally ill and infirm. When an recruit was not able to commit euthanasia as was required, he was simply reassigned without any dishonor or demerit. Thus Hitler's team managed to find the small percentage of people who are indifferent to the suffering of others, or who actually enjoy it. These men were sent to run the death camps.
These examples seem to suggest that human beings do seem to have an innate sense of care for their fellows. This leads to the question; is it the stresses of civilisation which lead humankind to acts of brutality or neglect? Is a sense of ethics toward our fellow man innate to us? Or are human rights something which must be claimed and defended as Amirpouya says, and are just another power construct.
Dec 17 2011: Hi Joanne,
In a nutshell both Thomas and Amirpouya have a point.
In the case of Thomas: humans are innately attuned to other humans. Babies cry when other babies cry, kids get worried when they see another kid suffering. The secret for this capacity lies in our mirror neurons, a mechanism that evolved long time ago to help us read the mind of another individual to understand their motivations. Another great example is the complex hormonal and brain structure change in the parents of a newborn. Humans that had a weaker attachment to their offspring probably didn't have many grandkids or great grandkids to spread their genes. Humans with a stronger attachment saw more of their offspring grow up to reproductive age. Some rudimentary moral feelings helped people maintain group structures.
In the case of Amiropuya: The basic, more ancient brain structures that we share with reptiles, still have a lot of influence in the way we react to other individuals; territorialism comes from that ancient drive to scare away competition from scarce resources, food, mates, nesting places. As humans started grouping together in order to survive, distrust of "others" (xenophobia) was a mechanism to maintain cohesion and improve life expectancy. Mechanisms evolved that discouraged individuals from drifting apart: group rejection triggers areas in our brain related to physical pain. Submission to leaders and a drive to climb the social scale is also embedded in ourselves.
There is no way to turn off those genes. They are part of what makes us human.
So each individual is a collection of conflicting drives that amazingly finds equilibrium every day.
I think our best shot at defining human rights is to understand what it means to be a human, to accept ourselves as such. The next step as Kathy points out is to reflect that acceptance outwards to other humans, see them as equals.
And yes, this means consciously fighting all of our ancient human drives, every single day
Dec 17 2011: Andres, thank you for your fascinating post. Where does that leave us? We can conclude, based on that, that some ethics are innate to us, but also that we have powerful drivers out of which counterproductive conflicts arise. Some of us reason that it is the second group of human characteristics which will ultimately protect us. Other people think societies are better places when we are governed by our innate sense of ethics and use reason to over come the drives which make us territorial and xenophobic.
It seems that people are polarised into these two camps, which have been the nucleus of many TED debates, and more yet to come, no doubt.Dec 17 2011: And since i didn't want to leave you on a low note... please watch this video (is in spanish but requires no translation) about an experiment that was performed with young kids in Spain. It is very much related to some of those innate drives that Thomas aludes to:
Dec 17 2011: I did not find you post a low note, quite the contrary. I'jj enjoy taking a look at the video. thanks.
Joe Medina
Dec 16 2011: In regards to universal human rights, if they are being conceptualized through our moral framework and not so much our culture specific ethical systems, I guess that would make them universal enough to be considered universal. However, "human rights" can embody alot of different ideas that various cultures won't agree on, i.e: democracy, freedom of speech, etc. Also, cultures have different aspects about them that influence our views, i.e: some cultures reflect a strong presence of personal accountability and are less inclined to feel bad for ppl who put themselves in bad situations. So i guess, as far as universality, I say it depends on the actual "human rights" subject and details surrounding it.Dec 15 2011: I suggest you to read the "Leviathan" by Thomas Habez .............
- +1
I didn`t read it completely but my idea -which is inspired by that book- is the current society is in basic conditions which there`s no right and everyone should fight for his/her right.
And if a government or a king or even a person claim for respecting to human rights it`s just an arrangement to gain some benefits -for example make people calm for taking taxes from them- and every time which suits for them they can break any right -like what we see in wars unfortunately-.
This was my idea .
Dec 15 2011: Hi Amirpouya, you seem to be saying that anything done in the name of human rights, a constitution, or a judicial system, a social welfare project, are just further constructs of a capitalist system, designed only to keep the majority from rioting and overthrowing the people holding the reins. Do I have it right?
Dec 16 2011: Hi Joanne
As I understood from nature and society till now- unfortunately yes.
but as I said it is my idea.
I don`t deny that we had -and have- some men and women like Gandhi or Cyrus the great -one of the ancient rulers of my country who wrote the human rights charter- who believed that humans should have some basic rights without wanting any money or power for themselves- but ......
Leviathan -and another famous book : "Z"- changed my idea from an idealistic world to a real one.
we have a famous idiom which means about : "Right is not givable.It is takable." or no one gives your right- you should get it.
so everyone has the right which he/her fought for it before.
Dec 16 2011: You said - ""Right is not givable.It is takable." or no one gives your right- you should get it.so everyone has the right which he/her fought for it before."
Here in the United States, we equate that to a lawless Wild West, with cowboys and whatnot, heard of it? This sets the stage for serious abuse. And in all honesty, to put it roughly, when you consider how govts create and/or support their own religions (ethical standards), as a means to an end, they are influencing "human rights" - regardless.......Dec 19 2011: I think you are quite right about "rights," Amirpouya. They are basically taken, not given. A person's rights are similar to, for example, an antelope's rights. They are defined by the flock or group. It's in the flock's interest to protect its members, so the members can count on a right to be defended. Of course humans have carried this somewhat further than antelopes, and more and more "rights" are claimed here and there. But in the end you get the rights that the society is willing to give, and the history is that every such right had to be fought for, or "taken." The reason is usually that ensuring a right for me involves an obligation on someone else or on the group as a whole. Perhaps it even intrudes on someone else's presumed rights.
(By the way, we spell the author's name Thomas Hobbes in English.)Dec 16 2011: sorry but it was impossible to reply to your last comment .......
you can equate my idiom to wild west or even the cavemen ages - but nature is always constant.
And if your last sentence was about the current conditions of my country - you`d better know I`m a victim of these conditions and I agree with you.
but I believe that the world everytime and everywhere have the same ruler: nature.
and nature`s rule is power.
It is what I understood from Leviathan.
and we have another idiom that I think suits this place : (no cat catches mice for God sake.)
sometimes in history the people had some rights which didn`t benefit their rulers apparently -Gandhi and Cyrus the great- but it was because of they loved their people.
and that was not a "right". it was because of they benefited mentally by people`s happiness.it was an "arrangement" which everytime everyone could break it.
I know what you and Derek have in U.S but see what your gov did in hiroshima - Iraq - Afghanistan - Pakistan -Vietnam - Iran and long before it to Indians in America.
I believe that those genosides was because they didn`t benefit them as much as you are.
I hope you to forgive me for my frankness.
and I suggest you again to read Leviathan. I think It`s a dictionary rather than a philosophy book.
Dec 16 2011: My comment was not directed at your country or your situation - what ever that might be.
Anyway, are you proposing that no good deed can be done out of pure love for another? If not, why do you assume that Gandhi and Cyrus created the human rights charter as a means to an end (their own happiness) as opposed to love?
The author sounds to me like a moral Nihilist.Dec 16 2011: moral nihilist .....
Thomas Habez didn`t say what I say exactly.
I said my thinkings are inspired by him.
Even in some fields I disagree with him. so I think those words suit me !!!!!
I believe that every right is giving because of a trade.
for most of situations the trade is "right - power(or money)" and in rare ones (Gandhi and Cyrus the great) is because of love or "right - mental satisfaction".
It is my thinking honestly. you can call it everything.
And in all of types of government "democracy-monarchism-aristocracism-feodalism-anarchism and ...." always there is a trade - especially in feodalism and current societies : capitalism.
If the matter of trade is love - it`s still a trade , but the society will be more happy and active.
and if not - the society will be like a group of lambs that if the shepherd give them more grass - It`s because he wants gain more money from the butcher.
yes - it`s totally nihilism - but could you call it False ?
Helen Hupe
Dec 16 2011: Unconditional love is not a "trade". It demands nothing and gives everything.Dec 20 2011: By Helen's definition of unconditional love... Women should continue to love men who beat them. No offense Helen...Dec 20 2011: David,
- +3
The loving can be unconditional in action, but not in state. I may love my brother unconditionally, and be willing to go past the line for him, but let me find him abed with my wife, or daughter, and then watch the state change.
The unconditional love she refers to seems to be more primarily unconditional, as in resting on a percieved firm foundation, than perfectly unconditional, as in just plain dumb.
That some spouses actually do continue to love thier abusers is, methinks, another matter and more the latter.
Regards.Dec 16 2011: Amirpouya,
1. what country do you live in?
cuhs in the US, we have rights guaranteed in a constitution that, except in very extreme cases, can;t be infringed upon. I'd say those are the greatest human rights you could ask for. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
2. I have heard plenty of people say what you said in some shape or form
Usually, those people do not reside in the continental U.S. To be honest, the writer of that book sounds like a conspiracy theorist. Because I haven't spent one ounce of energy fighting for my rights, but I still have them. They aren't something tangible that can be taken or abused. Yes, our troops have gone in and it was a little shady. Sure, off the records ops and what not.
The only reason I can't agree with you is cuhs I'm not seeing that in my life.
Ian Young
Dec 20 2011: Derek,
- +1
The trade Amirpouya mentions is self evident in my society, and I am next door in Canada. I Daily trade mutual rights, such as not butting into line ( right to space and equality) , I do not steal others goods though I am trained to want them (right to property), I don't insult others religions or sexuality,(right to freedom of expression), etc...The union movement of the '20s, the civil rights movement, womens liberation, right to abortion, gay rights, are more glaring examples and all within living memory.
Thomas Hobbes is a 17th century political and moral phisolsopher hailing from merry old England. In political philosophy he is held in the same reverance as Plato, Aristotle, Machiavelli, Kant, etc...Hobbes examined the then current concept of the "Social Contract", an Idea that individuals in a society have an underlying agreement of what rights are accorded to what individual. Whereas Rousseau ( 18c.)used the social contract to support very liberal arguments for governing, Hobbes followed the same concept to a justification of absolutism, such as monarchy.
It seemed to be his feeling that man's natural state was conflict, over resources, mates, security, etc... In doing so he also recognized mankinds rational nature, and thus his desire to gain peace if possible. He thus theorizes the best course is to not do unto others what we would have them not do to us.
Notice the difference between that and the adivce, do unto others as we would have them do unto us. The first is passive, the second active. Say we each have an apple.To Hobbes, the passive, - I don't take your apple, because my act would then legitimize your attempt to do the same to me. while the proactive - I should offer to share my apple, and you in turn might share yours. The former casts us as adversaries, and the latter allies..
You decide which you preffer.
RegardsDec 17 2011: Thanks Amirpouya, you have given me an interesting point of view, and I have been thinking about it for most of the day. I find that I disagree with you. I think we are born as loving whole complete entities and a sense of human rights comes out of this natural state of completeness with the world. Of course civilisation is a story of conflict and power struggles, so an individual's grip on ethics becomes distorted or in many cases. lost. Yet the closer an individual is to his original pure state (Ghandi, Mandela, Mother Theresa) the more connected to a natural sense of ethics, he or she will be. What do you think?
Dec 17 2011: Joanne -
I'm not sure but I think you didn't understand my meaning very well.
I think that our utopia are not so different : a city which what politicians say happens !
what Thomas Habbez drew in Leviathan is a picture from basic situation of a society:
a situation which we can see in wars or some movies like "gangs of New york".
A situation which anyone fights against anyone else.
Or as a philosopher -I forgot his name- said : kill your enemies and if you could your friends.
My utopia is a place that everyone love their society and the purpose be society's benefit.
But see the reality : everyone trade. Physically or mentally.
As Helen replied on my comment the real love unconditionable - but who can claim he/she loves someone who hates him/her ?
I believe that love is a phenomenon that converts pain to joy.
But still lover gains something instead of giving something.
When we are born , we have a clear and pure mind and full of love -
but what nature teachs us is this : you can't love lambs and love hamburgers too.
And I believe that if everyone believe to human rights like a religion - it becomes a respectful thing in that society - but we should wait for a renaissance ...
Dec 17 2011: I can see why, Amirpouya, you would look around you and form that conclusion. Yet I am interested if it is the only possible reality, i.e. if the current reality was inevitable and thus belongs to us humans completely, or if we have it because of a highly complex set of circumstances that began around ten thousand years ago.
I think it is the latter, and therefore, I too wait for a renaissance.....Dec 20 2011: Amirpouya,
If you have not, I would suggest a reading of Rousseau and his concept of the Social Contract, and the rights of the governed, which were in active debate with Hobes and his Leviathen of a book. I might also reccomend Erasmus and Voltaire, as representative of liberal philosophy in the period. Hobes I think, isolated the individual and it's complex relationship with rights, overlooking the fact that rights require a community in order to be pertinant. Without a cohesive group you have simply anarchic rights, i.e: those that you can take. In this model, effective groups are much less likely to form, as there is less benifit to the individual members.
Hobes, we must recall, wrote during the rebellious years which ended aristocratic absolutism in Europe and his concepts of real-polotik were based on his time. His period, and it's associated value system are incredibly removed from that which is common today, in that I despite being in the lower classes I find life to be anything but, "...nasty, brutish, and short."
Dec 20 2011: Ian
To be honest with you I love to read those books -especially mr.Rousseau whom I read nothing by him- but since I came to this university (PUT) I couldn't even finish Leviathan...
I will thank you if you explain your thoughts here.
But I want to add something :
I give an example from what mr.Hobbes said.
Imagine we're living in a society.
Have I any right about your life -to taking it- ?
Mayebe you answer no - but mr.Hobbes answers yes !
But you have this right about me too !
So it's the deal : I forgive my right to you because I want you to do it too !
And if you break this deal and harm me - there's no more deal. It becomes anarchy.
So do you really think that safety has a meaning here ?
Could you tell me what can I be sure about it ?
And please care about the concept - not who said it.
Dec 20 2011: Amirpouya,
By "not who said it", do you mean the origional author of the idea?, because Icertainly cannot claim to be author to thier thought. I assure you I have nothing against Hobes, if that is your meaning
As to the distindtion between Rousseau and Hobbes, well they start from the same foundation and build entirely different ideas. The Social Contract they both addressed is an idea that within society we have a series of agreements which inform us as to the rights and wrongs of a situation as well as to whom our duty lies.
Hobbes and his exchange of negatives, i.e.: I won't do to you what you won't do to me does accuratly predict behaviors in many cases, but that does not make it correct. As I said earlier it is also a very lonely philosophy, because it portrays life as conflict at every level, even into the family, mankinds oldest institution. I preffer, do unto others as I would have them do to me, as this is proactive and communal, rather than passive and individualistic.
We are, I would argue, a communal species, and as such a theory of rights is a theory of groups, not of individuals. An individual has all and every rights, as the only man on earth who is to stop him? It is groups that must build the social contract.
The rights accorded to individuals among hunter gatheres, (perhaps man's natural state) are informative here. Within the tribe it is very much do for others as you would etc... , but with outsiders it is more like Hobbes, I am not going to feed you if you are an unrelated group, but I will not attack you if you in turn don't attack me. A lame man among the hottentots vollunteered to be left behind during a hard desert crossing, rather than slow, and perhaps kill the clan. That is doing unto others... and I assert, a better method of grouping than Hobbes presents. Rather than a market of exchange, consider it a community of equals seeking the same goals, and recognizing that sharing our rights is better than hoarding them.
Rgards.Dec 15 2011: I think the broad nature of the current system of human rights reflects the ideals encompassed in them not so much the legal enforcement. If every human being could say they are being afforded the basic human rights we would be living in a very different world to the one we have now and, as the idea entails, a much better world.
To call them rights is a bit lack luster, how can something be a 'right' when more people don't have them than those who do?Dec 15 2011: Very interesting debate. I would like though to answer the more practical aspect of this question.
Human rights "officialy" are the base of all democracies. A question i never understand is, how come corporations from the US, Europe or Israel care about human rights in there own country, but when it comes to poor workers in india or china, who cares about their rights.
Yes, they should be universal. A farmer in Africa and a worker in Indonesia should have the same rights as a lawyer in NY or a start up bussines man in Israel.
And this is the moral reasons why im socialist.
Dec 16 2011: I'm gonna half agree with you. I agree that morally, a perfect socialist government would be the best. But tell me where this exists. Where everyone is treated 100% equal by the government, and the elite have the same rights as the poor. I hesitate to say human rights, and only say it for the lack of a better word.
As for the corporations, they have to care about the employees in their country because of laws that protect the workers. It's as simple as that. Our (i live in the US) government protects us from the corporations for the most part. In China, or other 3rd worldly countries, the standards are much lower. so this brings my first point-- maybe human rights are just a product of government and civilized morals? And with all of the intolerance in the world, I'd say Universal human rights is impossible. Not a chance it would work. Thoughts???
Dec 16 2011: First of all, about socialism. Equality is like Osmosis. I agree with you there will never be a situation of 100% equality between people, but if thats your ideal you will always be close, and economic and cultural gaps will not be high at all.
About corporations, "cheap work force" is one of the leading terms in capitalism. and when you think about it, "cheap workforce" simply means work force with out rights. I reccomend you to read the book "grapes of warth" which is happening in your country. a wonderful book that describes exacly what we are talking about here. If corporations would pay under the minimum wage to its workers [which happens with mexicans in the US and Africans in Israel], and not respect their civilians rights there would be raped by the media. But when workers in 3rd world countries have no rights we call it "cheap workforce". Dont you think thats an absord?Dec 28 2011: I give you bonus points for mentioning Monsanto, btw. Probably the greatest human rights violators on the planet. Their view of intellectual property, and their lawsuits against farmers who "save seed", a practice they are corporately responsible for outlawing... Is probably causing more human beings to starve, than any other power on the planet, including the US government.
They also directly violate everything good about the American Agrarian economy, that Jefferson, and most good people here, always wanted.Dec 27 2011: To me, our rights are simply an extension of the human person.As a living entity, and as one human family, rights are simply the duties we have as partakers of a community.Beyond that,our rights will be an abuse of our free will.Our rights can never be separated from our duties.Dec 27 2011: Amirpouya, just because you do something doesnt make it a right. That is a choice not a right. If you choose to hurt someone that is a choice it is not a right. You have the right to speak your mind, the right to think what you want, but your rights stop when they begin invading anothers space. You will do what you want to do and I will do what I want to do, but in the end Human rights are what dictate if you did or didnt break anothers space, comprimising their freedom.
As to being stronger, my friend you are only as strong as the next one, sooner or later someone stronger than you will come, they always do and you will have to submit to their choices (following your logic) which I simply cannot understand, that is a dictators mentality, selfish and egocentrical. TEDS is supossed to be an organization that brings people together so that they may share information, knowledge, not this illogical take on Human Rights. Too much sitting down behind a screen, not enough living...
Dec 27 2011: Tiago,
I didn`t say all of humans should fight and strongers should win -
I just said the reality is this.
I`m not the strongest person in the world - and if someone want to take what I claim is mine, I fight.
And if the enemy is stronger - it`s not mine anymore.
when Cyrus the great made the human rights charter - he was one of the most powerful kings in the world. so human rights became respectful.
but during a war -unfortunately there are lots of examples- if you- as a soldier - talk about human rights , the answer won`t be pleasant at all.
A right is a desirable thing that a stronger human promises to give to a weaker one - normally because of gaining something like power or mental satisfaction as I said in my recent comments in this conversation- and the right`s lifetime depends on the strong man`s honesty.
So if you live in North Korea - you can`t say : I have a right to access to internet.
In the end I want to add always we`re entering to each other`s space - not only geographically.
And the only way to preventing a fight is trading.
It`s my conclusion.


text:
The Home of Fashion Film
Report by Lou Stoppard on 24 February 2013.
'Tailored Mosaic' was the title of the collection, and aptly the opening dresses were so ornate they could have been lifted straight off the eye-popping ceiling at Venice's St Mark's Basilica. From the sweeping red velvet curtains that veiled the stage to the painted holy wine lips on each model, the theatre and performance of religious practice underpinned the collection. One girl even sported a sculptured gold bodice that resembled the kind of ornate chalice from which one takes communion at the altar.
Escarpins en velours noirs ornés de fleurs en tissu @DolceGabbana collection automne-hiver 2013-2014 #MFW #DGLive http://t.co/l7QjPs0uYq
Détail d'une robe en dentelle rouge rebordée de cabochons en backstage du défilé @DolceGabbana #MFW #DGLive http://t.co/6Y2oGNJmAJ
#TheLook at @dolcegabbana with #Katlin ! #MFW Xx http://t.co/DGA34f4o9k
"@GuidoPalau: 70 Beautiful Sicilian Princesses @dolcegabbana #fw2013 #mfw http://t.co/zH9R8cy391" So beautiful!
Front row @dolcegabbana - can you spot the dashing @DavidGandy? #followthebuyers #mfw http://t.co/NbOFL8sAc8
Dolce & Gabbana alternated between FW's trend of menswear tweeds and herringbones, Lace in blacks/reds & punctuated w/ornate embellishment
Backstage beauties @dolcegabbana #mfw http://t.co/zWDT0wmVsk
Sur la musique du film La Strada les reines dolce&gabbana #mfw http://t.co/6PQyAZL4lF
The mosaics on shoes, dresses, jewels and bags recall those in the Cathedral of Monreale in Sicily #dglive
Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana were inspired by the mosaic of Monreale for the Winter 2014 collection #dglive
@dolcegabbana's collection's first quarter is clearly inspired by Salamis Ruins and St. Barnabas Monastery, Cyprus. #proud #prints
Gran finale @dolcegabbana #fw2013 fashion show NOW#livestreamingon Vogue.it http://t.co/BTUw0mSjLw #mfw #appvogue http://t.co/UqR1yXt1RG
Crowns @dolcegabbana #fw2013 fashion show NOW #livestreamingon Vogue.it http://t.co/BTUw0mSjLw #mfw #appvogue http://t.co/eeTOU0QK8M
Gold filigree bustier embellished with stones and mosaic and dedicated to Saint Agatha #dglive
Princess and Queen-style golden crowns encrusted with stones and mosaic #dglive
.@mimmaviglezio 'This is certainly not subdued and discreet, but it is refined' #DGLIVE #MFW http://t.co/QVtNt0srgS
@dolcegabbana #dglive #mfw first looks .. opulent earrings .. literally 'Beauty Queens' coming down the runway!
incredible opening looks from @dolcegabbana at #MFW - gilded, ornate, extravagant. the models have become walking artworks.
Live from Metropol! It's all a surprise with @dolcegabbana #dglive http://t.co/b6FlAtFexB
Anticipation is building for the show! #dglive
The @dolcegabbana catwalk is looking decidedly bare - what will the show be like? #mfw
Bianca Brandolini d'Adda arriving at the show venue #dglive http://t.co/2uehhhyM7l
Spice girls playing as we arrive at @dolcegabbana #MFW there is a definite 90's feel to the soundtracks this season
A warm welcome to all those who are attending the show ;) #dglive
Backstage - Dolce&Gabbana Winter 2014 Womens show #dglive http://t.co/2G5LT7vloW
Our next #MFW show today will be @dolcegabbana who will no doubt bring the sunshine to Milan. #DGLive http://t.co/TLqImtvrPi
Going backstage to take a look at the final touches before the show #dglive http://t.co/jCRo3hBFNr
-1 day to the Winter 2014 Womens show: take a look at this exclusive video http://t.co/rqIbA0v873 - http://t.co/R2WkGsek05 #dglive #mfw


text:
Excelsior: Alpha nerds choose the 10 best comics
Batman (DC)
Capullo's art continues to shine. And make you scratch your head. And shine.
Animal Man (DC)
Never in its many incarnations has the Animal Man mythos been this fascinating.
Ultimate Spider-Man (Marvel)
Refreshing in its choices. Miles Morales is not Peter Parker.
East of West (Image)
Hickman is in pure form. A science-fiction Western? YES. The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse running around and kicking semi-righteous ass? Also YES.
Chew (Image)
It keeps getting more bizarre and funny and Rob Guillory's art continues to shine. Also, you can't argue with a comic that continues to make up increasingly awesome food-related superpowers.
Manifest Destiny (Image/Skybound)
Arguably the best title in Robert Kirkman's Skybound sub-label, this gem tells the "untold" tale of what Lewis & Clark REALLY found. Imaginative and nuts.
Origin II (Marvel)
A worthy follow-up to Origin. A pre-Wolverine Logan is sooooo ANGRY. And sad. And tragic. There's a spread in Issue #4 that made some of us go "NO!" AND "YES!" at the same time.
Uncanny X-Men (Marvel)
Cyclops is INTERESTING. #whatnoway
Lazarus (Image)
In the future, powerful families rule instead of governments or corporations. One genetically engineered member of the family kicks the asses of anyone the family decides needs it. Awesome.
Skullkickers (Image)
It's still hilarious. Like they say, it's "The Hobbit meets The Hangover."
Black Widow (Marvel)
We know this is more than 10, but we added this cuz she is bad ass. Period.
When we're looking for comics in our local nerd den, we're often overwhelmed by the quantity of new titles each week. That's not even counting the back issues and collected series in trade paperback format.
So we asked some of the most alpha nerds we know: the folks at Industrial Toys, a game development team (Midnight Star) with a who's-who pedigree in geek. There's CEO Alex Seropian, the co-founder of Bungie games (Marathon, Halo), Tim Harris, part owner of Alley Cat Comics in Chicago, John Scalzi, best-selling science fiction author, and Mike Choi, a veteran comic book artist in his own right.
Harris and Seropian, along with art director Aaron Marroquin and senior graphic designer Sarah Chiappetta, chimed in to our request with the comic books that they think are the best in the bin.


text:
How to make a Noble M600 European
To get a car into Europe you need a lot more than a passport. TG went to Noble to see what it takes…
Posted: 11 Apr 2013
That chunk of carbon above is a freshly baked and birthed Noble M600. Looks the same as all the other M600s you've seen, right? Wrong. By the time it rolls off the production line, there'll be literally thousands of changes compared to the ones you've seen before. These changes have cost Noble more than £300,000 and a year's worth of head scratching, but you'd be hard-pressed to even notice them.
Why would a company invest so much time and money into changes that make hardly any difference to the way it looks, and for a car it has only made a dozen of? Because it's the length that this British supercar manufacturer has had to go to make it eligible for sale in Europe. Once there, Noble can sell it into 27 more countries and potentially double the production capacity.
Up until now, M600s have been road legal thanks to the Individual Vehicle Approval (IVA) scheme. Unlike other manufacturers who have hundreds of staff and loads of cash to throw at a new car, Noble's team numbers just 12. But wanting to mix with the big boys, it went above and beyond what it needed to do to pass initial IVA tests for the 2011 production car, most notably crash testing the car, and doing a 24-hour non-stop high-speed endurance test around Bruntingthorpe Aerodrome.
However, the drawback is that IVA testing only allows the cars to be sold in the UK. That's why Noble took the decision to make it European, which meant reading pages and pages of rules and regulations and entering a game of engineering Buckaroo.
The European rules are very stringent. And as soon you change one thing on the car to abide to the regs, you have to move, make or support something else which can completely differ the dynamics, look and feel of the car - something that Noble wanted to avoid as much as possible. This also adds time and money. And considering it costs £125K in paperwork alone to make a car EU spec, they wanted to nail the changes first time around. But having no experience in doing this, no IKEA-style flat-pack instructions to follow and only one consultant and two engineers to make the necessary changes, Noble had to be like the automotive Happy Gilmore and make a hole-in-one every single time. They didn't hit it on every go, either...
One of the biggest problems was with the lights. If you click through the gallery, you'll see it's the most visual change on the car. To comply with European regs, the high beam had to move and daytime running lights had to be added. But this meant they had to source a new sidelight and shuffle them all around to keep the distances between the lights correct. It's intricate stuff. And then the indicator had to be scalloped to allow the right amount of light out of the side. Then it had to be flown to Italy, sprayed with all kinds of chemicals and tested to see if it passed. It didn't. So the work had to be modified and the process had to be repeated. You can see why this gets frustrating.
Aside from the lights, the other biggest challenge was to quieten the M600. Not an easy task when you've got a car with a 650bhp, Yamaha-sourced twin-turbo 4.4-litre V8, boasting a better power-to-weight ratio than a Bugatti Veyron. They had to reduce the 'drive-by-noise' from 99db to 75db, a task Noble's engineers described as 'Herculean'. The solution was to lengthen the exhaust, then fold it back over itself like - much like a motoring large intestine - and then apply soundproofing in the arches. So if you knock on the rear arches of an old, IVA-spec M600, it'll sound hollow, because there's less exhaust stuffed underneath. That's a Top Gear Top Fact.
But it's the smaller changes which are every engineer in the world's - aside from James May, that is - nightmare. Previously, every switch on the Leicestershire supercar was written out in plain English. If you wanted to turn the lights on, you'd hit the switch that said 'LIGHTS'. Annoyingly, not everyone in Europe speaks English. So Noble had to change every single switch inside the car to European-friendly symbols. Have a look inside your own car at the number of symbols, and you'll soon realise how much hassle that is.
The door cards had to be modified so that the door pull was recessed and the edge of it was a bit smoother, something that required re-tooling. As did re-styling the rear windscreen so it didn't reflect as much as it used to. And while these changes were being made, someone was upstairs reading through close to 50 regulations just so they knew where your rear numberplate could go. Sounds like madness doesn't it? But it gets worse. EU cars have to be able to do an emergency lane changing manoeuvre at 80 per cent of their top speed... with no power steering. Which isn't a hard task for a small hatchback as it's around 70 mph. But for the 225 mph Noble, it's 180ish mph - which required large doses of bravery by the test driver. Even so, it passed.
These are just some of the many changes, but we can now confirm that the car is now EU worthy. The M600 is now more efficient, more comfortable and slightly better than ever before. But the thing is you wouldn't even notice, and neither would your bank account as the price is still the same.
So next time you see a M600, see if you can spot if it's a European spec model. Here's a tip: tap the rear arches.
Words and Pictures: Rowan Horncastle


text:
The Navigator wire aviator has a classic slightly square shape, with uncompromised design and comfort The spring hinges flex to fit a wide variety of faces Metal alloy frames feature polarized polycarbonate lenses that reduce glare and provide 100% protection from harmful UV and UVB rays Through advanced lens technology, Suncloud polarized lenses selectively filter horizontally reflected, visually interfering light waves know as glare'" The elimination of direct and ambient glare results in superior visual clarity, definition, color transmissions and optical comfort This process helps to create a rigid polarizing film carrier and eliminates distortion
Suncloud frames and lenses feature 8 base curvatures, enabling the frame and lenses to wrap on the wearer's face 8 base lenses provide added protection from annoying side glare and environmental elements such as wind, dust and particulate matter All Suncloud lenses are manufactured from optical grade Polycarbonate material; the results are a lightweight lens with high impact resistance for added protection Suncloud Polarized Optics comes with a Microfiber storage bag When not storing the sunglasses in the bag, it can be used to clean any smudges off your lenses
Suncloud Navigator's have two lens selection depending on the user's needs, Polarized Gray for elimination of glare and the truest transmission of natural colors and Polarized Brown for elimination of glare and enhanced contrast while maintaining the accuracy of color transmissions Know where your going with Suncloud navigators!
This product has a limited lifetime warranty.
(888) 206-2995


text:
I would be very pleased if one of the readers could answer my dilemma.
Attached are two photos of a contingent of the Cheshire Regiment in Hyde.
Thanks for the update Eric.
Great photos, always nice to see our boys on parade.
I've been trying to deduce a more accurate date for these photos, and I arrive at the period 1989 or 1990.
Firstly, the obvious clue are the rifles the lads are carrying. They are SA80's, which came into full service in 1987.
Secondly, the BSkyB satellite dish on the Co-Op wall is very '89-'90.
And lastly, the GM bus we see at the far end of Greenfield St, is, I think, painted in the '89 to '93 livery.
As for the occasion, if I remember correctly, it was just a recruitment drive, and a chance for the lads to bee seen in their dress uniforms.
I can remember they also had some armored vehicles on the market, and some weapons on display.
I got the chance to hold on of the SA80 assault rifles, which I thought at the time were quite heavy.
The buses lined up along Greenfield St, look like the regiments transport for the day, as you can see one of the soldiers looking out from the windows.
We've reached the bottom now.
Not sure about the 70's. Were satellite dishes prevalent then?
It's good news that the blog is still up and running, keep up the good work. If you need any help just shout!
Thanks Chris you're far more observant than I am. Lee Enfield Mark 3 were my forte.
I'll pass the information on to my friend.
Anonymous hits the right tone, I must say!
Thanks John T.
My Grandad Rafe served with the Regiment in WW1, His son my uncle Ralph was killed with the Regiment Salerno WW2, I served with the Regiment as a National Service man 1959 and 1960 at Singapore and Northern Ireland, A proud Regiment now the Mercian Regiment.
So glad to see the blog is still up and running, I have looked on it about three times a week since the altered images blog in Nov. Even if we only get something on it once a week, thats ok. We won't give up on you, we will keep logging on!
Merry Christmas to everyone,and a Happy new year. Special best wishes to Tom.
Some Cheshire lads got back to me, the SA 80 was introduced 1988, the parade they think was 1989 Kape tour 1989 Tercentenary,
The members of the regiment agree.
Carl Murphy said "Yep it was the tercentenary march through Cheshire main towns"
During my service we paraded and were wined and dine at several towns, including Stockport.
The buses referred to do look a bit like the old SHMD livery, but they are actually unmistakeably ECW-bodied Bristol VRTs of Crosville Motor Services, wearing the cream and Brunswick green livery which was introduced in the post-deregulation era. That would date the picture to somewhere between 1986-9.
Keep the Army in the Public Eye
Keith Mellor


text:
"There's no replacement for displacement." That's the motto of those who believe the way to more power is through an engine with a larger bore and stroke, instead of one that uses other means (like more or bigger carburetors, or freer-flowing cylinder heads) to achieve that goal.
That also applies to engine choices in the Midyear Corvettes, at about the mid-point of the C2's production history. In mid-March of 1965, RPO L78-the 425hp 396-joined the Corvettes' option list, with a sticker price of $292.70. It didn't take long for Vette buyers to do the math-the big-block delivered 50 more hp than the RPO L84 fuel-injected 327 did, for around $245 less. Though 2,157 '65 Vettes received the 396 during its 51/2-month stay on the option list, Chevrolet was committed to the then-new Mark IV big-block engine being Corvette's top performance engine beyond 1965. After that year, not only was the fuelie 327 gone as an option, so was the RPO L76 365-horse 327.
In later years, as second-generation Corvettes passed from owner to owner, big-block engine swaps were fairly common, thanks to the availability of factory parts like engine mounts, crossmembers, hoods, and stiffer front springs that enabled a 396, 427, or 454 to go where a 327 once resided. That's what happened to Del Kendall's '65 Sting Ray coupe, though at first glance you'd likely think this car was one of the late '65s whose 396 went in at St. Louis.
But the engine you see here didn't go in there, nor is it a 396. "We put a 454 short-block in it and used the original '65 rectangular-port heads, solid-lifter cam, and original intake manifold," he says from his Estes Park, Colorado, home. However, he didn't swap out the original 327 that this Sting Ray was built with. "It didn't have the original engine in it when I got it," says Del. "So, I felt alright about changing a few things."
Those changes came after some needed repairs were performed. "It had a little bit of front end damage," he says of the C2 that he bought from a friend about a decade ago. "We replaced part of the upper surround and put new bumpers on it and some other odds and ends in the front end."
By "we," he means his brother Dan, who helped out with the bodywork and paint, and who built the 468ci (454 bored .060-inch over) powerplant. Del also says this project wasn't one that seemed to take forever from start to finish. "It took Dan two months to do the body, working on it full-time with a helper," he says. "It was not a frame-off restoration, but they stripped it completely, and they cleaned it up under the hood." Also going in under the hood was a Vintage Air HVAC system.
Change was also in the works for the Sting Ray's cabin, though not at first. "We put new Saddle leather upholstery in it, which was the original color, but I didn't like it," Del recalls. "So, we changed the interior to white leather. It looks great, and you don't see that very often."
The chassis got a freshening to the suspension system, but the original front coils springs/rear leaf setup stayed in. "When I bought it, it had reproduction knock-off wheels and redlines," says Del of what was on each corner outboard of the four-wheel-disc brakes. "I remember those tires being a lot better than they were! So, I put a set of Michelin radials on it, and the car just drives completely different with them on."
It was Del's memory of a Vette in his past that prompted him to go the big-block route on his '65, while keeping its original styling intact. "I had one in 1965, a 396-powered convertible," he says. "I remember what they drove like." That memory stayed with him through the years, when he had over two dozen other Corvettes as personal cars (though not all at once), and he's bought and sold another 50-60 more over the years.
One of the Vettes he's kept is an ultra-rare Midyear: One of the 20 L88-powered '67s, which Del says he'll restore someday. "It was a race car that got beat around," he says. "I've turned down a lot of money for it, and it's really a basket case, but it has the original block and heads, and it's got the other stuff that would be impossible to find like the (radio/heater) block-off plates, and the original airbox hood. It's a neat old car to look at-but it's a basket case."


text:
The Sentient SF
Our weekly and monthly stay hotel is nicely furnished and recently upgraded with 36 single-occupancy rooms, located in the heart of the dynamic Mission District. Our themed rooms are designed to amaze even the dullest of senses as we strive to become one of the only hotels in the city that caters to the creative mind and welcomes a community for artists alike.
All rooms are recently upgraded with full furnishing for comfortable living and modern equipment. As we transition away from the typical hotel environment; we are designing each room to be completely unique from the other. Each room is equipped with:
•* Twin Size Bed
•* Small Refrigerator
•* Small MicroWave
•* Television (Cable Not Provided)
•* High Speed Wi-Fi
•* Sink in each room
•* Single and Double occupancy
•* Shared Bathrooms (No private baths)
•* 6 total bathrooms and 5 shower rooms
•* Small, Medium & Large rooms available
•* Offering weekly and monthly stays
•* Sorry No Pets
Please Note:
Check In Time: 2:00PM-5:00pm
Check Out Time: 12:00PM
Minimum Night Stay: 7 nights
Registration is not guaranteed until customer contacts hotel within 24 hours of check-in for final confirmation on check in time.
* San Francisco Visitor Policy will be followed.
Verfügbarkeit & PreiseWähle bitte die Termine aus und klicke auf "Daten aktualisieren", um die Verfügbarkeit zu sehen
ReiserücktrittsversicherungDiese Unterkunft hat eine 1 Tage Stornierungsfrist. Ergeht innerhalb dieser Zeit keine Stornierung, wird eine Stornogebühr in Höhe der ersten Nacht des Aufenthalts in Rechnung gestellt.
AnfahrtKarte anzeigenKarte verbergen
179 Julian Ave
San Francisco, CA 94103
Driving directions to 179 Julian Ave, San Francisco, CA 94103 from San Francisco International Airport
1. Head north 36 m
2. Keep right at the fork 750 m
3. Keep right at the fork 500 m
4. Take the ramp to US-101 N
1.5 km
5. Keep right at the fork, follow signs for US-101 N/San Francisco and merge onto US-101 N 16.5 km
6. Slight left to stay on US-101 N (signs for Golden Gate Bridge/Ninth St/Civic Center) 1.3 km
7. Take exit 434A for US-101 N/Mission St/Duboce Ave toward G G Bridge 270 m
8. Keep left at the fork, follow signs for Duboce Ave and merge onto Duboce Ave 270 m
9. Turn left onto Valencia St 190 m
10. Turn left onto 14th St
87 m
11. Take the 1st right onto Julian Ave
Destination will be on the left
300 m
179 Julian Ave
San Francisco, CA 94103


text:
Wedding Dresses near bingham,il
Other Wedding Vendors near bingham,il:
|Wedding Band (62)
|Wedding Beauty & Health (300)
|Wedding Catering (192)
|Wedding Ceremony Music (70)
|Wedding DJ (212)
|Wedding Dress & Attire (154)
|Wedding Event Rentals (143)
|Wedding Favors & Gifts (81)
|Wedding Flowers (245)
|Wedding Invitations (130)
|Wedding Jewelry (124)
|Wedding Lighting & Decor (26)
|Wedding Officiant (159)
|Wedding Photography (717)
|Wedding Planning (191)
|Wedding Rehearsal Dinner (49)
|Wedding Transportation (52)
|Wedding Travel Agents (51)
|Wedding Venue (540)
|Wedding Videography (115)
You've chosen the maximum (5) items in this category. Compare your items or remove and replace with another.Compare Now
0 Vendors Selected. Select up to 5 vendors to compare in one of the following categories: Venues, Bands, Catering, Photography or Videographers.
Signature Bridal2 Reviews
Chesterfield, MO | 636-778-3200
Signature Bridal is a bridal boutique in the heart of Chesterfield Valley. We carry a beautiful selection of bridal gowns. Each and every one of...(more)
Mia Grace Bridal
Chesterfield, MO | 636-778-3433
From classic, timeless designs, vintage inspired glamour, free style bohemian, romantic, whimsical, or modern, if you are looking for more than...(more)
Simply Elegant Bridal72 Reviews
St. Louis, MO | 314-241-8201
Shop in a relaxed atmosphere and experience a beautiful selection of gowns and accessories. From gown selection to final fitting, our friendly...(more)
Alfred Angelo is one of the most trusted designers of wedding attire. For more than 75 years our family-run design house has had the pleasure of...(more)
Boulevard Bride7 Reviews
Lake St Louis, MO | 636-561-4030
Private User's review: Boulevard Bride has a nice view and an environment to match! The ladies are friendly and very helpful; they... (more)
Allure Bridals40 Reviews
*Find the Allure Bridals Retailer Near You*
Allure Bridals has grown into an award-winning bridal manufacturer from a background of 12 years as a retail store. In 1998, Allure produced...(more)
Kleinfeld has been turning wedding dreams into realities for more than 65 years, offering the finest and largest selection of designer wedding...(more)
White Traditions Bridal House63 Reviews
Where Bridal and Fashion Collide...
Saint Charles, MO | 636-939-6005
Hello, and welcome to White Traditions Bridal House! At White Traditions we strive to provide the customer service that a blushing bride...(more)
Champagne & Lace Bridal34 Reviews
Collinsville, IL | 618-345-5223
When you say yes we have the dress! As the area's premier bridal boutique, our ultimate focus is creating a unique and memorable experience to...(more)
Elegance Made Simple3 Reviews
Let us help make your wedding dreams come true ...
Troy, MO | 636-528-5647
Elegance Made Simple Wedding Shop provides top designer bridal gowns, prom dresses, tuxedo rentals from Jim's Formal Wear, wedding cakes...(more)
Main Street Bridal18 Reviews
We love our brides!
Carlinville, IL | 217-854-8824
Main Street Bridal opened its doors for the first time in May of 2000 and has been busy helping hundreds of happy brides since then. We offer a...(more)
Clarice's Bridal Fashions136 Reviews
St. Louis, MO | 314-351-2499
Clarice's Bridal Fashions is a full-service bridal boutique specializing in custom designs since 1979. We look forward to meeting with you to...(more)
Essense of Australia20 Reviews
Find an Essense of Australia Retailer Near You
Essense of Australia is a global bridal gown design leader. With more than 18 years of wedding dress expertise, the Essense of Australia...(more)
Dreamlines Dress Sketch28 Reviews
Anniversary Gift or Wedding Day Gift
O'Fallon, MO | 314-884-1659
At Dreamlines we create a wedding dress sketch and tuxedo sketch from your wedding photos. Truly a gift to make her cry....seeing her dress...(more)
Contact Us Website
If you have or are serving in the military we will offer a free bouquet sketch with a wedding dress sketch order.
Formals of Litchfield110 Reviews
Central Illinois' Largest Bridal and Prom Superstore
Litchfield, IL | 888-324-4513
At MyFormals Our Promise to you is: you'll be treated like Family, because You matter to us! One Wedding dress, One Prom Dress, One Tuxedo at a...(more)
An understated word with significant meaning charmed us. And so began, BHLDN (pronounced beholden). Inspired by the Dutch word for "to keep," as...(more)
Frontenac Cleaners - gown care1 Review
St. Louis, MO | 314-993-6030
Laura's review: DO NOT TAKE YOUR WEDDING DRESS TO BE CLEANED HERE! I have never had such a horrible experience in my life. Where... (more)
Wedding Wishlist2 Reviews
Your one stop bridal shop! Gowns, Gifts, Dresses, Décor, Invitations, Supplies & More...
Florissant, MO | 314-831-3422
Wedding Wishlist is your one stop bridal shop and quite a unique boutique! Offering a gorgeous variety of off the rack options for the bride and...(more)
Contact Us Website
Let us know you found us here! Use the coupon code tenoff upon checkout and save $10 off your purchase of $25 or more...
Callahan's Tuxedo, Alterations & Gown Preservation3 Reviews
1 stop shop: tuxedo rentals, bridal alterations and more
Saint Louis, MO | 314-664-5521
Callahan's Tuxedo is a family owned and operated business which has been "Dressing" wedding parties for the past 45 years. Located in Affton at...(more)


text:
Check out these personalized certificates. They are the what the winners of the AMSOIL Best of the Best, presented by Danchuk received when their cars were voted the top machines at the Super Chevy Show at Palm Beach International Raceway.
The Super Chevy Show traveling circus moves West this weekend with the second-annual event at The Strip in Las Vegas. There will be an SCCA-presented autocross, big-dollar bracket classes, True Street and an enormous car show.
At said car show, the editors of Super Chevy Magazine will be picking nominees for the AMSOIL Best of the Best, presented by Danchuk. The nominees will appear at bestofthebest.superchevy.com by noon Monday and visitors to this site will be allowed to vote for the best car in each of five categories: Camaro, Nova, Tri-Five, Chevelle/Malibu and Full-Size, 1958-up.
The event will actually kick off Friday morning with a cruise from Original Parts Group Inc. in Seal Beach, California. Team Super Chevy will be leading the charge to Las Vegas, with a stop at Peggy Sue's '50s diner in Yermo, California, for lunch. We'll be arriving there around 12 or so feel free to join the cruise to Vegas from there if you can't make it to OPGI.


text:
It is said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, so there's little doubt that the world-famous Chevy Corvette C6R racing team-Johnny O' Connell, Jan Magnussen, Olivier Beretta, Marcel Fassler, Antonio Garcia, and Oliver Gavin (along with the semi-retired Ron Fellows and erstwhile endurance-race driver Max Papis)-are accustomed to the adulation they receive when fans create tributes to their race cars. But as the accompanying photos attest, some of these faux track stars stand roof and fenders above the rest.
"I built my Corvette as a tribute to the 2006-2007 Corvette Racing championship team," Jaime Recabo, a motorsports attorney in Bronxville, New York, tells VETTE. "In fact, it's my second rolling homage to the team."
In 2003, Recabo bought an '04 Z06 Commemorative Edition and transformed it into a rolling panegyric to the "Les Bleus" Corvettes that raced Le Mans in 2003. "I obtained permission from Corvette Racing manager Doug Fehan to reproduce the full decal set from the No. 50 and No. 53 race cars and made my own C5-R replica," he says.
His passion for Corvette Racing continued to burn, and in 2005, he special-ordered a Velocity Yellow '06 Z06, with the dream of turning it into his second Corvette Racing tribute. "Even before the car was delivered, I had already obtained the full decal set from the No. 3 and No. 4 2005 C6.R race cars. When it arrived, I immediately transformed it into the tribute car, doing the full decal installation myself in my garage."
Due to the extreme cost of precisely duplicating a real C6.R, Recabo's plan was to mirror the championship cars in exterior appearance only. Accordingly, he sought some professional help from the Corvette aftermarket. "I obtained the carbon-fiber rear wing from LG Motorsports. Lou Gigliotti had originally run it on his World Challenge race car in Speed GT, and he sold it to me without any mounts. I found out it was originally manufactured by ACP Motorsports, so I contacted [company president] Kerry Hitt, who made me the endplates, mounting mechanisms, and duck bill, and refinished it. He also supplied me with an ACP World Challenge carbon-fiber hood, C6.R-style front-fender vents, rear-fender NACA ducts, and World Challenge carbon-fiber rocker panels." The parts were installed by Redz Auto Restoration in New Rochelle, New York, along with an MTI-sourced carbon-fiber front splitter.
Recabo says he would have been satisfied with a "good C6.R lookalike fashioned after the Corvette GT1 race cars," but his all-consuming devotion to Corvette Racing meant more needed to be done. That's when the real kicks began-with a capital "K," as in Katech Performance.
"I was a regular at Corvette Racing activities and often saw Jason Harding (Katech Director of Aftermarket Operations) and Ron Helzer (Katech Senior Engine Technician) at these events," Recabo says. "They loved what I had done but kept joking that I had to come to them to get a 'real' engine." In July 2007, Recabo obliged, tapping the company to provide one of its 550hp Street Attack LS7s-a streetable facsimile of the race-proven (and Katech-built) LS7R.
According to Harding, Street Attack 7.0L Serial #20 features a stock LS7 block stuffed with a factory forged-steel crank, factory titanium rods re-bushed with Katech solid bronze bushings, and Katech forged pistons. The stock CNC-ported LS7 heads retain their 2.200-inch titanium intake and 1.615-inch sodium-filled exhaust valves, but were outfitted with Katech high-lift valvesprings, along with PSI springs and titanium retainers. Directing the valvetrain geometry is a Katech Torquer LS7 camshaft with 220/244-deg duration at 0.050, 0.615/0.648-inch lift with the factory 1.8-ratio rocker arms, and a 110-degree lobe-separation angle. The compression ratio remains the same as stock, at 11:1, allowing the engine to run on pump gas.


text:
Not specified.
100% of system value; 75% of system value exemption for dual-use equipment
'''''Note: The California State Board of Equalization (BOE) approved new [http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/pdf/lta12053.pdf guidelines] for the Active Solar Energy Systems New Construction Exclusion. The guidelines clarify that the exclusion applies to qualified locally assessed commercial, industrial, and utility-scale systems. '''''
Section 73 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code allows a property tax exclusion for certain types of solar energy systems installed between January 1, 1999, and December 31, 2016. This section was amended by [http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1451_bill_2... AB 1451] in September 2008 to include the construction of an active solar energy system incorporated by an owner-builder in the initial construction of a new building that the owner-builder does not intend to occupy or use. This only applies if the owner-builder did not already receive an exclusion for the same active solar energy system and only if the initial purchaser purchased the new building prior to that building becoming subject to reassessment to the owner-builder. ABX1-15 of 2011 clarified that systems installed through sale-leaseback arrangements or partnership flip structures can benefit from this exclusion. Click [http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/pdf/lta11030.pdf here] and [http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/pdf/lta11039.pdf here] for Letters to Assessors from the State Board of Equalization that further explain the impact of ABX1-15.
Qualifying active solar energy systems are defined as those that "are thermally isolated from living space or any other area where the energy is used, to provide for the collection, storage, or distribution of solar energy." These include solar space conditioning systems, solar water heating systems, active solar energy systems, solar process heating systems, photovoltaic (PV) systems, and solar thermal electric systems, and solar mechanical energy. Solar pool heating systems and solar hot-tub-heating systems are not eligible.
Components included under the exclusion include storage devices, power conditioning equipment, transfer equipment, and parts. Pipes and ducts that are used to carry both solar energy and energy derived from other sources qualify for the exemption only to the extent of 75% of their full cash value. Likewise, dual-use equipment for solar-electric systems qualifies for the exclusion only to the extent of 75% of its value.
System owners should contact the applicable county assessor's office for further information. Click [http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/assessors.htm here] for a listing of County Assessor offices in California, and [http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/pdf/lta08071.pdf here] for a December 2008 letter to the assessor that further clarifies the terms of the exclusion.