text:
What % of your YouTube views are from Mobile apps and direct traffic (unknown sources)?
- {{ replies[$index].thank_error_message }}{{ post.thank_error_message }}
Hi I asked a lot of questions here the last one was really informative some guys put step by step way for affiliate marketing but i don't know why warrior forum deleted it. I am 22 and i am a writer (novels and short stories) but the thing about writing is it's not passive income sometimes there is no money at all.it's really hard but i really enjoy it. recently i moved out and i am living alone now and this not having money made me really stressed. i can't focus on my writing anymore. with only 500-600 dollars per month i can easily live my life(i don't live very fancy ) ) and enjoy writing my stories. I really need to find a way that is guaranteed and i can make money with it from this second. that way even if my stories didn't get published i don't need to panic and i can still enjoy writing more stories.
I am starting my website roygol.com (doesn't have anything in it yet) as I want to promote my MLM opportunity and affiliate products. My main goal is to present my MLM op to those interested. I do not want to go into the niche of teaching people how to make money online as I see so many doing it.
I want to get into PPC but I am confused about what kind of landing page I need. I want to give away a free ebook in exchange for their name and email. I looked at ads in google and only found one example of such a landing page. Here's what it looks like: https://love2014.leadpages.co/7-steps-2/
What would you write on your blog when you haven't even launched your product? I looked at 10 blogs and saw that most of them wrote about 'How they achieved and X metric' (non-relevant to the product), culture and other stuff when the whole idea is to gain more 'beta interests'! As a marketer, what will you do? In other words, what will be your content marketing strategy?
I heard about it somewhere, maybe in the conversation with friends, he gave me an example of link bait but not sure about it, he told me that lots of news and media publishing website are using this in their social media account. Can anyone be more specific about it?


text:
Steals & Deals
On Sale!
We regularly update this page with great deals on espresso machines, coffee makers, grinders, accessories, coffee and more.
Jura ENA Micro 1 Automatic Coffee CenterThe Jura ENA Micro 1 Automatic Coffee Center is tiny but mighty, delivering a gourmet cup of espresso or coffee with an ultra-compact footprint. Unlike many single cup brewers on the market, the ENA Micro 1 delivers a true bean-to-cup experience by grinding fresh beans right before brewing, eliminating the need for capsules or pods. The intuitive touchscreen interface is simple to operate, allowing you to program three cup sizes and select from two dosage levels depending on how strong you'd like your cup. Learn More$799.00
DeLonghi Magnifica ECAM 23210B Espresso MachineThe DeLonghi Magnifica ECAM 23210B is one of the most compact superautomatics we have ever seen, but don't let its small size fool you. The Magnifica ECAM 23210B contains many of the features found on much larger and more expensive machines, such as an intuitive interface, removable water tank, automatic three hour shut off and energy saving mode, a professional quality burr grinder and a cup warmer. Learn More$999.95
Breville Infuser Espresso MachineFor espresso lovers who want a machine that offers stability and control without breaking the bank, Breville created the Breville Infuser. It provides steady low-pressure pre-infusion that gives espresso shots a full flavor and aroma in every sip. The Infuser incorporates built in PID temperature control. Learn More$499.99
Saeco Poemia Espresso Machine - Certified RefurbishedA certified refurbished Saeco Poemia is an excellent way to build your budding barista skills. A great learning machine, it is easy to use and forgiving of many rookie mistakes. With a pressurized portafilter, there is no need to perfectly tamp your espresso in order to pull a great shot. The built-in panarello will have you making lattes for your friends in no time! Taking design cues from higher end Saeco machines, the Poemia is stylish, compact and affordable. Learn More
Regular Price: $129.00
Saeco Syntia Stainless Steel Compact HD8837/47 Espresso Machine - Certified RefurbishedThe Refurbished Saeco Syntia Compact Espresso Machine is crafted in a striking stainless steel and features a petite design with cutting-edge functions such as a three-color display with simple icons for brewing and maintenance, Saecos Aroma System that pre-wets your coffee grinds, a quiet ceramic grinder and a Rapid Steam System, to name a few. With Saeco's Syntia, your favorite drink preferences are easily stored and ready to brew in no time. Learn More
Regular Price: $849.00
Out of Stock

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Mikasa® Glass Leaf 3 Pillar Linear
Our Price: $39.99
You Save $40.00
Item #5106590
In Stock
This lovely Mikasa Glass Leaf 3 Pillar Linear will add a charming glow of candlelight to any room of your home. This lovely centerpiece features a black "twig" metal base with glass leaf accents that cradle 3 crackle glass pillar candle holders (candles not included). It is a timeless beauty and will be a piece you will proudly display for your friends and family. Glass Leaf 3 Pillar Linear measures 7 inches high x 8 inches wide x 20-3/4 inches long.
4.10 lbs.
7.0 in.
8.00 in.
20.75 in.


text:
"Beauty is just kind of an accident. Beauty is just a happenstance. Beauty is the remainders of being a painter."
"I trained as a painter—and I used to draw from the nude, like most people. But then I got really politicized and started to question why I had to do nudes and I started making work about perestroika. But the world was changing, the Cold War was coming to an end, and I didn't know quite what the implications of that would be."
-Yinka Shonibare MBE


text:
Hilderbrand to compete at UNL
GHS standout joins track team.
Gothenburg High School graduate Mark Hilderbrand is one of 34 recruits who have signed to compete with the University of Nebraska-Lincoln track and field team beginning this fall.
Hilderbrand, a 2010 graduate, is a four-year Nebraska state track qualifier who earned seven medals including three in the hurdles.
Hilderbrand earned his first medal as a freshman when he ran the opening leg of the fourth-place 4x400 relay. As a sophomore in 2008, Hilderbrand took third in the 300 hurdles and ran the third-leg of the eight-place 4x100 relay.
He earned third-place in the 300 hurdles again as a junior in 2009 and assisted in the 4x100 relay's fourth-place finish by running the opening leg.
Hilderbrand improved one spot in the 300 hurdles to finish runner-up as a senior with a time of 39.92 seconds. He also captured his third straight medal in the 4x100 relay as the third leg contributing to a fifth-place finish.
Hilderbrand was named the school's Dutch Zorn Award winner as the top male three-sport letter winner. He is the son of Mike and Connie Hilderbrand.
Latest Headlines
- New hospital safety ratings now available to the public
- Mentees, others share value of TeamMates
- Playground equipment tops Lake Helen priority
- School administrators reorganize with one less
- Turning to the next page
- The Crossing gets special use permit
- Hotline brings sellers and buyers together


text:
Photos/Weights/Quotes: Rico Ramos vs Alejandro Valdez
Atlantic City, N.J. – Both undefeated and World Boxing Association (WBA) No.-1 ranked super bantamweight Rico Ramos and former world title challenger Alejandro Valdez weighed in at 122.5 pounds during Thursday's weigh in at Bally's Atlantic City Hotel & Casino.
Ramos, of Pico Riviera, Calif., will look to keep his perfect 18-0 (10 KOs) record in tact and move one step closer to a world title when he faces Valdez (24-4-2, 17 KOs), of Ciudad Obregon, Mexico, in a 10-round 122-pound main event of ShoBox: The New Generation tomorrow/Friday, Feb. 1, LIVE on SHOWTIME® (11 p.m. ET/PT, delayed on the West Coast).
Unbeaten rising knockout artist Cornelius White (15-0, 14 KOs) tipped the scales at 167 pounds and once-beaten Chicago native and fellow super middleweight prospect Don George (20-1-1, 17 KOs) measured 168 pounds for their 10-round super middleweight co-feature.
Friday's fights will originate from Bally's Grand Ballroom in Atlantic City, N.J., and are promoted by Goossen Tutor Promotions.
What the fighters had to say on Thursday:
"Tomorrow night you can expect to see a lot of jabs from me, right hand ring generalship. You can expect that I will stay composed and use the ring a lot for to my advantage.
"I expect Valdez to come forward and brawl and try to make me lose my composure.
"I always expect the fight to go the distance although I don't want it to. Alex should be prepared to come for 20 rounds!"
"Message to boxing fans: Be ready for Rico 'Suavecito' Ramos at 122lbs!"
"I have come prepared to give a good show for the boxing fans and win my fight. Tomorrow night I will be working on Rico Ramos by throwing a lot of punches to his body. If the opportunity lends itself for a knockout, I'll take but I am ready for the full 10 rounds."
"This is just another test that I'm ready and able.
"George is coming to prove that he is better than his last fight. I'll tell you one thing, he ain't going to prove it on me."
"Coming off my first loss, this is a must win fight for me. If I lose, the odds are I won't be boxing much longer. I don't want to be an opponent.
"I don't want to take anything away from the guy who beat me but it was a fluke.
"I'm going to try to be smart in the first couple of rounds but I'm not going to back down if this guy slugs.
"These laptop tough guys who have me in the right column will see I'm a world class fighter and not a "B" guy."
Curt Menefee will call the ShoBox action from ringside with Steve Farhood and Antonio Tarver serving as expert analysts. Gordon Hall is the executive producer of ShoBox with Richard Gaughan producing and Rick Phillips directing.
sure do. tried selling it to BS but they didnt bite. Made so called greatest Amateur of all time look like a 2nd rate paper champ.Comment by killacash on 02-11-2011
[QUOTE=KingMidas;10091022]Rico trains out of my gym Sweet Science in Hawthorne, CA he is a funny guy. Always cracking jokes, but seriously he is a beast in the ring. We got video of him whoppin on some so current "champions" from…Comment by KingMidas on 02-11-2011
Rico trains out of my gym Sweet Science in Hawthorne, CA he is a funny guy. Always cracking jokes, but seriously he is a beast in the ring. We got video of him whoppin on some so current "champions" from…Comment by Spray_resistant on 02-11-2011
[QUOTE=memento126;10089107]Damn this Don George dude is gonna get fukked up other guy is huge mofo. He was beaten to pulp by Francisco Sierra few months ago.[/QUOTE] Too bad they couldn't get Sierra to fight White, what is George's management thinking…Comment by memento126 on 02-11-2011
Damn this Don George dude is gonna get fukked up other guy is huge mofo. He was beaten to pulp by Francisco Sierra few months ago.Post a Comment - View More User Comments (9)


text:
There's a name missing from Charlie Savage's latest — a description of the legal analysis behind Osama bin Laden's killing: Caroline Krass, who served as Acting Head of DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel from January to September 2011. She's not mentioned, apparently, because she was not among the four lawyers who collaborated on five memos deeming the raid to be legal.
Weeks before President Obama ordered the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound in May 2011, four administration lawyers hammered out rationales intended to overcome any legal obstacles — and made it all but inevitable that Navy SEALs would kill the fugitive Qaeda leader, not capture him.
Just days before the raid, the lawyers drafted five secret memos so that if pressed later, they could prove they were not inventing after-the-fact reasons for having blessed it. "We should memorialize our rationales because we may be called upon to explain our legal conclusions, particularly if the operation goes terribly badly," said Stephen W. Preston, the C.I.A.'s general counsel, according to officials familiar with the internal deliberations.
This account of the role of the four lawyers — Mr. Preston; Mary B. DeRosa, the National Security Council's legal adviser; Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel; and then-Rear Adm. James W. Crawford III, the Joint Chiefs of Staff legal adviser — is based on interviews with more than a half-dozen current and former administration officials who had direct knowledge of the planning for the raid.
The account makes it quite clear that Eric Holder was excluded from discussions.
On April 28, 2011, a week before the raid, Michael E. Leiter, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, proposed at least telling Mr. Holder. "I think the A.G. should be here, just to make sure," Mr. Leiter told Ms. DeRosa.
This means that on the OBL raid, Donilon excluded the Attorney General in the same way Dick Cheney excluded John Ashcroft from key information about torture and wiretapping. I find that interesting enough, given hints that Holder raised concerns about the legal authority to kill Anwar al-Awlaki in the weeks after we missed him on December 24, 2009, which led to OLC writing two crappy memos authorizing that killing in ways that have never been all that convincing.
But Savage provides no explanation for why Krass was excluded, which is particularly interesting given that the month after OBL's killing, Savage revealed that President Obama had blown off Krass' advice on Libya (as I read it, the decision to blow off her advice would have happened after the OBL killing, though I am not certain on that point). The silence about Krass is also remarkable given that she was looped in on the initial Libya decision — and asked to write a really bizarre memo memorializing advice purportedly given after the fact.
On Libya, Krass was looped in on questions addressing precisely the same issues addressed in the OBL killing (indeed, we were assassinating Qaddafi's family members in Libya, which should have presented many of the same legal questions) both before and (as I understand it) after the OBL killing, but she was apparently not read in at all on the OBL killing itself.
There's one more reason I think the question of OBL's killing was more uncertain than laid out here. Savage reveals that even though lawyers had authorized not telling Congress about the raid, Leon Panetta did so on his own anyway.
Mr. Preston wrote a memo addressing when the administration had to alert congressional leaders under a statute governing covert actions. Given the circumstances, the lawyers decided that the administration would be legally justified in delaying notification until after the raid. But then they learned that the C.I.A. director, Leon E. Panetta, had already briefed several top lawmakers about Abbottabad without White House permission.
This is the action of someone — rightly — covering his ass, doing what the law actually requires rather than what his lawyer says it permits.
By the way, any bets on whether SSCI got a copy of that Preston memo, stating that they didn't need to be informed on covert operations, contrary to the clear language of the National Security Act, before they approved his promotion from CIA General Counsel to DOD General Counsel (where he remains)? I bet no.
Ultimately, Savage depicts an Administration going even further than Cheney had on inventing legal authorizations for secret actions. Obama (and Donilon) will never catch heat for it like Cheney did, because everyone likes dancing on OBL's watery grave. But make no mistake, this exhibits some of the same behaviors as we criticize Cheney for.
Update: I find this, from Savage's June 2011 story on Krass, of particular interest given Savage's description of the decision process on OBL.
The administration followed an unusual process in developing its position. Traditionally, the Office of Legal Counsel solicits views from different agencies and then decides what the best interpretation of the law is. The attorney general or the president can overrule its views, but rarely do.
In this case, however, Ms. Krass was asked to submit the Office of Legal Counsel's thoughts in a less formal way to the White House, along with the views of lawyers at other agencies. After several meetings and phone calls, the rival legal analyses were submitted to Mr. Obama, who is a constitutional lawyer, and he made the decision.
A senior administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk about the internal deliberations, said the process was "legitimate" because "everyone knew at the end of the day this was a decision the president had to make" and the competing views were given a full airing before Mr. Obama.
As you likely know, I'm firmly of the belief that one should call DC memoirs — especially those written by National Security figures — autobiographical novels, because they tend to stray so far from the truth (that's true of all autobiographies, but in DC it seems far more motivated). Turbo-Tax Timmy Geithner is about the only DC figure whose memoir has ever been treated with any of the skepticism it deserves.
With that in mind, I wanted to look at this detail from Leon Panetta's book, which Katherine Hawkins alerted me to.
To illustrate how Obama's micromanagement hurt relations with Congress, Panetta describes the negotiations with Dianne Feinstein over the cables that went into the torture report.
She requested access for her staff to every operational cable regarding the program, a database that had to be in the hundreds of thousands of documents. These were among the most sensitive documents the agency had. But Feinstein's staff had the requisite clearances and we had no basis to refuse her. Still, I wanted to have some control over this material, so I proposed a deal: Instead of turning over the documents en masse to her staff, we would set up a secure room in Virginia. Her staff could come out to the secure facility and review documents one by one, and though they could take notes, the documents themselves would stay with CIA.
When the White House found out, they went apeshit, calling Panetta into the Situation Room for a spanking.
"The president wants to know who the fuck authorized this release to the committees," Rahm said, slamming his hand down on the table. "I have a president with his hair on fire, and I want to know what the fuck you did to fuck this up so bad."
I'd known Rahm a long time, and I was no stranger to his language or his temper, so I knew when to worry about an outburst and when it was mostly for show. On this occasion, my hunch was that Rahm wasn't that perturbed but that Obama probably was and that others at the table, particularly Brennan and McDonough, were too. Rahm was sticking up for them by coming after me.
It went back and forth like this for about fifteen minutes. Brennan and I even exchanged sharp words when I, unfairly, accused him of not sticking up for the agency in the debate over the interrogation memos. Finally, the White House team realized that whether they liked it or not, there was no way we could go back on our deal with the committee. And just like that, the whole matter was dropped.
Rahm and Brennan spanked Panetta, he claims, but then the whole thing blew over.
There are just three problems with this story.
First, according to the quotations Dianne Feinstein revealed from her agreement with Panetta, the CIA wasn't supposed to "have … control over this material."
Per an exchange of letters in 2009, then-Vice Chairman Bond, then-Director Panetta, and I agreed in an exchange of letters that the CIA was to provide a "stand-alone computer system" with a "network drive" "segregated from CIA networks" for the committee that would only be accessed by information technology personnel at the CIA—who would "not be permitted to" "share information from the system with other [CIA] personnel, except as otherwise authorized by the committee."
Far more significantly, Panetta doesn't mention the documents that disappeared during Panetta's tenure — ostensibly, on orders from the White House.
In early 2010, the CIA was continuing to provide documents, and the committee staff was gaining familiarity with the information it had already received.
In May of 2010, the committee staff noticed that [certain] documents that had been provided for the committee's review were no longer accessible. Staff approached the CIA personnel at the offsite location, who initially denied that documents had been removed. CIA personnel then blamed information technology personnel, who were almost all contractors, for removing the documents themselves without direction or authority. And then the CIA stated that the removal of the documents was ordered by the White House. When the committee approached the White House, the White House denied giving the CIA any such order.
After a series of meetings, I learned that on two occasions, CIA personnel electronically removed committee access to CIA documents after providing them to the committee. This included roughly 870 documents or pages of documents that were removed in February 2010, and secondly roughly another 50 were removed in mid-May 2010.
And Panetta also doesn't mention what may or may not be the same set of documents, those withheld by CIA on behalf of the White House, as described by Stephen Preston in response to Mark Udall.
With specific reference to documents potentially subject to a claim of executive privilege, as noted in the question, a small percentage of the total number of documents produced was set aside for further review. The Agency has deferred to the White House and has not been substantively involved in subsequent discussions about the disposition of those documents.
In other words, CIA didn't live up to its deal with Feinstein, not with respect to this set of documents, anyway. After turning over all the cables it believed SSCI had a right to obtain, it then took some back. As far as we know, it never did provide them.
We know that one of the Torture Report's conclusions is that the CIA lied to the White House.
While there's good reason to believe CIA lied to Condi Rice, there's also abundant reason to believe that Dick Cheney and David Addington knew precisely what was going on. If I had to guess, the documents CIA stole back probably make that clear.
Panetta would have us believe that, after his spanking by John Brennan and others, the whole matter was dropped. Which is a convenient tale, except that it obscures that the White House succeeded in clawing back documents CIA originally believed SSCI was entitled to.
Jason Leopold liberated another White Paper — this one dated May 25, 2011 — on drone killing.
Man. It's just like they kept throwing legal arguments against the wall in hopes that one saying "You can kill Americans with no due process" would stick. And since this one is not signed, we may never know what lawyer gets rewarded with a lifetime judicial sinecure!
I'll have a lot more to say on the logistics of all this in a later post.
But I want to comment briefly on a point that Kevin Jon Heller made in his post on the memo (remember, Heller's the guy who forced David Barron to write more than 7 pages to authorize killing Awlaki by raising a statute Barron hadn't considered).
Heller still sees absolutely no justification for CIA being granted public authority to kill Americans in this White Paper.
Like the earlier memorandum, the White Paper is largely devoted to establishing that the public-authority justification applies to the foreign-murder statute and that members of the US military would be entitled to the justification. (Two conclusions I agree with.) It then simply says this (pp. 14-15):
Given the assessment that an analogous operation carried out pursuant to the AUMF would fall within the scope of the public-authority justification, there is no reason to reach a different conclusion for a CIA operation.
That's it. That's the sum total of the unredacted argument. But there is a reason to reach a different conclusion "for a CIA operation" — as pointed out above, the AUMF does not apply to the CIA. Which means that the source of the public-authority justification must lie elsewhere.
Now let me be clear: I am not saying the CIA cannot be entitled to the public-authority justification. I am simply pointing out that the AUMF does not provide the CIA with the necessary authority. Perhaps there is another source, such as Title 50 of the US Code, as my co-blogger Deb Pearlsteinhas suggested. Indeed, the redaction on page 16 of the new White Paper may well refer to that other source of authority, given that five or six lines of redacted text follow this statement:
Thus, just as Congress would not have intended section 1119 to bar a military attack on the sort of individual described above, neither would it have intended the provision to prohibit an attack on the same target, in the same authorized conflict and in similar compliance with the laws of war, carried out by the CIA in accord with _____.
I don't understand why the OLC would need to redact a reference to Title 50 (or to some other source of authority). The legal source of the CIA's authorization to kill Americans overseas — if one exists — hardly seems like a state secret. Until the government reveals that source, however, we remain entitled to conclude that the CIA drone-strike that killed Anwar al-Awlaki violated 18 USC 1119.
I don't think those redacted lines he points to are a reference directly to statute.
I think it's a reference to the September 17, 2001 Gloves Come Off Memorandum of Notification which we know authorized killing high value al Qaeda figures with drones.
After all, that's precisely where Stephen Preston — then CIA's General Counsel before he moved onto bigger and better General Counseling at DOD — said he'd look to for the authority for CIA to carry out certain operations (and when he gave this speech, it was regarded to be part of the set of drone killing speeches Obama's top officials gave in 2012, and he discusses assassination, which several of the drone authorizations also do, specifically).
Authority to Act under U.S. Law.
First, we would confirm that the contemplated activity is authorized by the President in the exercise of his powers under Article II of the U.S. Constitution, for example, the President's responsibility as Chief Executive and Commander-in-Chief to protect the country from an imminent threat of violent attack. This would not be just a one-time check for legal authority at the outset. Our hypothetical program would be engineered so as to ensure that, through careful review and senior-level decision-making, each individual action is linked to the imminent threat justification.
A specific congressional authorization might also provide an independent basis for the use of force under U.S. law.
In addition, we would make sure that the contemplated activity is authorized by the President in accordance with the covert action procedures of the National Security Act of 1947, such that Congress is properly notified by means of a Presidential Finding.
Preston would look to a Finding, and we know there was (still is, as far as we know!) a Finding authorizing precisely the thing the government claimed to have done, kill a top al Qaeda figure.
Remember, too, David Kris — who left DOJ not long before this White Paper explicitly authorizing CIA's execution of the execution got written — issued this warning about the real secrets behind the National Security Act's language prohibiting CIA from violating US statute.
For example, the covert action statute could be interpreted and applied in ways that may be extraordinarily important, but about which very, very few Members of Congress, let alone the American People, ever learn. The statute defines covert action to exclude "traditional" military and law-enforcement activities, provides that a covert action finding "may not authorize any action that would violate the Constitution or any statute of the United States," and specifically warns that "No covert action may be conducted which is intended to influence United States political processes, public opinion, policies, or media." Without making any comment, express or implied, on any actual or hypothetical covert action, or even acknowledging that any covert action of any kind has ever actually taken place, it is quite obvious that each of those elements of the statute could raise enormously difficult and complex interpretive questions, some of which might affect many Americans. Yet it might be impossible, in many cases, to explain those interpretations without revealing the most sensitive classified information. [60; footnotes removed]
In killing Awlaki, CIA was acting in both a law enforcement (that's where the Fourth Amendment argument derives from) and Traditional Military capacity (which is how these endless justifications apply the public authority to CIA, by claiming CIA officers are just like soldiers). Kris tells us the statute says CIA can't, but that the NSA "could be interpreted and applied in ways [that] very few Members of Congress, let alone the American People, ever learn."
It has to have in this case, because CIA acted as both law enforcement and military in violating a slew of statutes to carry out the drone killing of an American citizen as part of a covert op. Kris is basically saying that part of the NSA doesn't mean what it says. That it means something far more horrible.
Which means he's also saying — as was Preston — that the drone killing of Anwar al-Awlaki was done on Article II authority.
It is, admittedly, a guess. But I believe that behind that redaction, the White Paper makes it clear this killing was done on Presidential authorization.
As reader Tom has helpfully reminded me, both Mark Udall's follow-up questions for Stephen Preston and the CIA's declaration in ACLU's FOIA to liberate the Torture Report describe the arrangements CIA required of the Senate Intelligence Committee staffers as they were working on the Torture Report.
Udall described how the CIA insisted on an "unnecessary multi-layered" process that added significantly to the time and cost of the report.
The CIA declined to provide the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence with access to CIA records at the Committee's secure office space in the Hart Senate Office Building. Instead, the CIA insisted that the Committee review documents at a government building in Virginia. Once the CIA produced relevant documents related to the CIA detention and interrogation program, the CIA then insisted that CIA personnel—and private contractors employed by the CIA—review each document multiple times to ensure unrelated documents were not provided to a small number of fully cleared Committee staff. What role did you play in the decision to employ these unnecessary multi-layered review steps that delayed CIA document production to the Committee at significant governmental expense?
And the CIA declaration emphasizes how SSCI retained complete control over the materials in the Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility in which its staffers had been required to work.
One key principle necessary to this inter-branch accommodation, and a condition upon which SSCI insisted, was that the materials created by SSCI personnel on this segregated shared drive would not become "agency records" even though this work product was being created and stored on a CIA computer system. Specifically, in a 2 June 2009 letter from the SSCI Chairman and Vice Chairman to the CIA Director, the Committee expressly stated that the SSCI's work product, including "draft and final recommendations, reports or other materials generated by Committee staff or Members, are the property of the Committee" and "remain congressional records in their entirety." The SSCI further provided that the "disposition and control over these records, even after the completion of the Committee's review, lies exclusively with the Committee."
Based on this inter-branch accommodation, SSCI personnel used the segregated shared drive to draft the document that is the subject of this litigation. As sections of the report reached a certain stage, the SSCI worked with the CIA information technology and security personnel to transfer these drafts from the segregated shared drive to the SSCI's secure facilities at the U.S. Capitol complex so that the Committee could complete the drafting process in its workspaces.
Here's the thing. The purported control SSCI had over the materials in this SCIF is central to CIA's claim that the Torture Report is not an Agency document and therefore is immune from FOIA.
If SSCI did not have complete control over this material — if CIA could spy on SSCI at will (if, as seems to be the case when viewed in retrospect) — then it guts their argument that the Torture Report is a Congressional document.
If CIA pwned SSCI in that SCIF, then it should make this material (at least the draft reports, before they got moved over to SSCI's own SCIF) FOIA-able.
So either CIA should be prosecuted for hacking SSCI. Or it should hand over the last draft of the report that resided on servers it felt free to hack into.
As I noted in January, comments Mark Udall made in the course of confirming Stephen Preston to be DOD General Counsel make it clear that CIA's lies about a detainee generally believed to be Hassan Ghul are one of the new revelations in the Torture Report. For a number of reasons, I believe one thing CIA lied to DOJ about is when they tortured Ghul.
As I'll show in a follow-up post, the question of when they tortured Hassan Ghul may reflect not just on the torture program, but also on the dragnet.
The public record claiming Ghul was tortured in July and August, 2004
We can lay out a rough timeline of the torture of the detainee believed to be Ghul based on several data points. First, Jay Bybee's response to the Office of Professional Responsibility report (see page 22) makes it clear a July 2, 2004 Principals Committee meeting pertained to detainee "Janat Gul," custody of whom CIA had reportedly (see PDF 59) just obtained (Bybee would not have been at the meeting — he had become a Circuit Court Judge over a year earlier — so he must be relying on what the OPR report says).
In addition, we can trace back the documents leading up to a reference to "Gul" in the May 30, 2005 CAT memo (see page 7). That reference describes an August 25, 2004 letter that asked for permission to use — among other things — water dousing and abdominal slaps. The approval to that request, dated August 26, 2004, cites the August 25 letter, an August 2, 2004 letter from John Rizzo, and a July 30, 2004 letter. An August 6, 2004 letter approving waterboarding also cites the August 2 Rizzo letter.
In the August 10, 2005 Techniques memo, some of these same documents are cited; the memo also reveals its subject was obese and had heart problems. Although the Techniques memo approved waterbaording, it said it was not used with the subject of the memo because of a medical contraindication.
All of this would seem to give the following chronology for Hassan Ghul's torture (assuming he is the detainee referred to as Gul):
July 2, 2004: CIA obtains custody and in a Principals Committee meeting discusses his torture
July 7, 2004: Goldsmith provides guidance on acceptable techniques
July 22, 2004 (5 days after Goldsmith's departure): John Ashcroft approves the use of all Bybee Memo techniques, except for waterboarding
July 30, 2004: Letter to Daniel Levin including description of torture techniques
August 1, 2004: Government raises threat level in advance of election year threats, announces surveillance of financial institutions, though reports are years old
August 2, 2004: Letter from John Rizzo to Levin, including details on when the CIA would use waterboarding and a medical and psychological assessment of Ghul
August 6, 2004: Daniel Levin advises that subject to reservations, CIA's use of waterboarding not illegal
August 19, 2004: Letter to Daniel Levin detailing new limits on waterboarding
August 25, 2004: In letter to Daniel Levin asking to water douse Ghul, CIA claims the CIA believed (when it got custody) Ghul had actionable intelligence on "pre-election" threat to United States, had extensive connections to various al Qaeda leaders, members of the Taliban, and Zarqawi, and had tried to set up a meeting "at which elements of the pre-election threat were discussed"
August 26, 2004: Levin approves four new techniques with Ghul, including water dousing
This chronology suggests DOJ repeatedly told CIA waterboarding was not permissible in the weeks after Jack Goldsmith withdrew the Bybee Memo, but after the National Security establishment raised the threat level on August 1 because of years-old surveillance in the US, DOJ relented and approved waterboarding with Ghul. Subsequently, it appears, CIA decided Ghul was not healthy enough — either because of his heart condition or his obesity — to undergo waterboarding, so they instead water doused him in near-freezing temperatures.
The problem with this chronology
There is just one problem with that chronology: the CAT memo discusses two detainees (see page 6). The description of the first detainee — someone involved in the alleged 2004 pre-election threat — mentions the August 25 letter which elsewhere in the memo ties to Gul by name.
Update, March 12, 2015: We know from the Torture Report that the detainees treated in July and August 2004 were not Hasan Ghul, but Janat Gul and two others.
In my last post, I noted that in his report that Hassan Ghul served as a double agent before we offed him with a drone, Aram Roston stated, without confirming via sources, that Ghul is the person whose name was not entirely redacted on the bottom of page 7 in the May 2005 Convention Against Torture (CAT) torture memo. I noted that if Ghul is the detainee (and I do think he is, contrary to what sources told AP when the CIA was hunting Ghul down with drones in 2011), then we're going to be hearing about him — and arguing about his treatment — quite a bit more in the coming weeks.
That's because, according to information released by Mark Udall, the detainee named in the CAT memo is one of the detainees about whose treatment the CIA lied most egregiously to DOJ. This is apparently one of the key findings from the Senate Intelligence Committee Torture Report that CIA is fighting so hard to suppress.
Mark Udall's list of torture lies
Back in August, Mark Udall posed a set of follow-up questions to then CIA and now DOD General Counsel Stephen Preston. Udall was trying to get Preston to endorse findings that appeared in the Torture Report that hadn't appeared elsewhere (in his first set of responses about CIA's lies to DOJ, Preston had focused on CIA's lies about the number of waterboardings, which the CIA IG Report had first revealed). Udall noted that that lie ("discrepancy") was known prior to the Torture Report, and asked Preston to review the "Representations" section of the Torture Report again to see whether he thought the lies ("discrepancies") described there — and not described elsewhere — would have been material to OLC's judgements on torture.
Udall gave Preston this list of OLC judgements that might have been different had CIA not lied to DOJ. (links added)
The 2002 memo is the original Abu Zubaydah memo, the lies in which (pertaining to who AZ was, what the torture consisted of, what had already been done to him, and whether it worked) I've explicated in depth elsewhere. The 2006 memo authorizes torture in the name of keeping order in confinement and the 2007 memo authorizes torture (especially sleep deprivation); both of these later memos not only rely on the 2005 memos, but on the false claims about efficacy CIA made in 2005 in their support. The lies in them pertain largely to the purpose CIA wanted to use the techniques for.
Which leaves the claims behind the 2004 letters and the 2005 memos as the key lies CIA told DOJ that remain unexplored.
The 2004 and 2005 lies to reauthorize and expand torture
I'm going to save some of these details for a post on what I think the lies told to DOJ might be, but there are two pieces of evidence showing that the 2005 memos were written to retrospectively codify authorizations given in 2004, many of them in the 2004 letters cited by Udall.
We know the 2005 memos served to retroactively authorize the treatment given to what are described as two detainees in 2004, purportedly in the months after July 2004 (though this may be part of the lie, in Ghul's case) when DOJ and CIA were trying to draw new lines on torture in the wake of the completion of the CIA IG Report and Jack Goldsmith's withdrawal of the Bybee Memo.
We know the May 10 Combined Memo was retroactive because Jim Comey made that clear in emails raising alarm about it.
I just finished a long call from Ted Ullyot. He said he was calling to tell me that "circumstances" were likely to require that the second opinion "be sent over tomorrow." He said Pat had shared my concerns, which he understood to be concerns about the prospective nature of the opinion and its focus on "prototypical" interrogation.
He mentioned at one point that OLC didn't feel like it could accede to my request to make the opinion focused on one person because they don't give retrospective advice. I said I understood that, but that the treatment of that person had been the subject of oral advice, which OLC would simply be confirming in writing, something they do quite often.
This memo probably, though not definitely, refers to a detainee captured in August 2004 in anticipation of what the Administration claimed (almost certainly falsely) were election-related plots in the US.
And we know the May 10 Techniques and May 30 CAT memos are retroactive because we can trace back the citations about the treatment of one detainee, the detainee who appears to be Ghul, to the earlier letters from 2004.
Just as an example, the August 26 letter cited in Udall's list relies on the August 25 CIA letter that is also cited in the CAT Memo using the name Gul (the July 22 and August 6 letters are also references, at least in part, to the same detainee).
So we know the 2005 memos served to codify the authorizations for torture that had happened in 2004, during a volatile time for the torture program.
The description of Hassan Ghul in the lying memo
There are still some very funky things about these memos' tie to Hassan Ghul (again, that's going to be in a later post), notably that Bush figures referred to the Ghul of the August letters as Janat Gul, including in a Principals meeting discussing his torture on July 2, 2004; sources told the AP after OBL's killing that this Janat was different than Hassan and different than the very skinny Janat Gul who had been a Gitmo detainee.
But this description — the timing of the initial references and the description of his mission to reestablish contact with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi — should allay any doubts that Ghul is one of two detainees referenced in the CAT memo.
Intelligence indicated that prior to his capture, [redacted] "perform[ed] critical facilitation and finance activities for al-Qa'ida," including "transporting people, funds, and documents." Fax for Jack Goldsmith, III, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, from [redacted] Assistant General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency (March 12, 2004). The CIA also suspected [redacted] played an active part in planning attacks against United States forces [redacted] had extensive contacts with key members of al Qaeda, including, prior to their captures, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed ("KSM") and Abu Zubaydah. See id. [redacted] was captured while on a mission from [redacted] to reestablish contact with al-Zarqawi. See CIA Directorate of Intelligence, US Efforts Grinding Down al-Qa'ida 2 (Feb 21, 2004).
Ghul was captured by Kurds around January 23, 2004, carrying a letter from Zarqawi to Osama bin Laden.
So while there are a lot of details that the Senate Torture Report presumably sorts out in detail, it seems fairly clear that Ghul is the subject of some of the documents in question, and that, therefore, there are aspects of the treatment he endured at CIA's hands that CIA felt the need to lie to DOJ about.
We've known for years that CIA lied to DOJ about what they had done and planned to do with Abu Zubaydah. But a great deal of evidence suggests that CIA lied to DOJ about what they did to Hassan Ghul, a detainee (the Senate Report also shows) who provided the key clue to finding Osama bin Laden before he was tortured.
If that's the case, then I find the release of a story that, after that treatment, he turned double agent either directly or indirectly in our service to be awfully curious timing given the increasing chance we're about to learn more about these lies and this treatment with any release of the Torture Report.
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch released reports on US drone killings today. For the moment, I'm going to outsource reading the reports to Sarah Knuckey's excellent post.
Both reports (per Knuckey) point to individual drone strikes on civilians that may or probably violate international law.
Specific US strikes killed civilians in violation of the law and US policy. These are the first major reports by each organization detailing field investigations into specific strikes. HRW reviewed six strikes in Yemen (occurring between December 2009 and April 2013). HRW concluded that two of the strikes violated international law (pp. 54, 67), four may have (pp. 30, 39, 43, 60), and none of the six appeared to have complied with Obama's May 2013 Presidential Policy Guidance (p. 89). AI reviewed all 45 reported Pakistan strikes between January 2012-August 2013, and investigated nine in detail. AI's legal findings include that "evidence indicates" that an October 2012 strike unlawfully killed a grandmother and injured eight children (p. 23), and AI had "serious concerns" that a July 2012 strike that killed 18 and injured 22 (p. 24) may have been a war crime or extrajudicial execution (p. 27). AI also investigated a number of strikes on apparent rescuers (those who came to the scene of a first strike to help the wounded), which it concluded may have been illegal (pp. 28-30). Neither report seeks to assess the total number or rate of civilian casualties for all strikes.
Investigations and accountability obligations. AI states that the US has legal obligations to investigate any cases where there are "reasonable grounds to indicate that unlawful killings have occurred," and to prosecute, and remedy where appropriate (pp. 35-37). HRW similarly states that the US has a duty to investigate violations of the laws of war, and that government secrecy effectively denies victims' right to redress (p. 87). Both reports also state the US should provide compensation or condolence payments for any civilian harm, but that neither organization is aware of the US having done this (AI, p. 39; HRW, p. 88).
This documentation of civilian casualties, of course, provides further evidence Dianne Feinstein and Mike Rogers' claims about civilian casualties are false.
Which means, in addition to the fact that we're violating international law with some of our drone killings, we also are seeing a recurrent trend.
Even the CIA's own lawyer agreed that CIA didn't properly inform Congress, including the Intelligence Committees, about torture.
We're learning that vast parts of the NSA's spying — including spying that collects US person data — remains largely hidden from the Intelligence Committees.
And we have yet more proof they have been misinformed about drone killings.
Is there some dubiously legal program the Intelligence Community has fully informed Congress on?
Andrew Sullivan is newly convinced — but surprised and confused — that President Obama is permitting John Brennan to hold up the release of the Senate Torture Report.
It is becoming clearer and clearer that one major power-broker in Washington is resisting the release of the Senate Intelligence Committee's allegedly devastating report on the torture program run by the Bush-Cheney CIA. That major power-broker is the Obama administration.
You might be surprised by this, given the president's opposition to torture and abolition of it. But the evidence is at this point irrefutable
Brennan answers to the president, who has urged the release of the report.
So why the hold-up? That is the question.
Why is Obama allowing Brennan to undermine Obama's own position? Why is the president allowing the CIA to prevent the very transparency he once pledged to uphold? I don't know. But what I do know is that it is now Obama who is the main obstacle to releasing the Senate Report on Torture.
Mind you, the evidence was pretty irrefutable back in May, too, and became more so in July. Moreover, I'm not sure Obama has "urged the release of the report" — though Joe Biden has.
The explanation for Obama's silence on this report seems pretty obvious if you read both Stephen Preston's answers to Mark Udall's questions and Obama's past actions on torture. In short:
With specific reference to documents potentially subject to a claim of executive privilege, as noted in the question, a small percentage of the total number of documents produced was set aside for further review. The Agency has deferred to the White House and has not been substantively involved in subsequent discussions about the disposition of those documents.
Indeed, I wonder whether the evidence in the Senate report showing CIA lied to the White House is not, in fact, cover for things some in the White House ordered CIA to do.
This is, I imagine, how Presidential Findings are supposed to work: by implicating both parties in outright crimes, it builds mutual complicity. And Obama's claimed opposition to torture doesn't offer him an out, because within days of his inauguration, CIA was killing civilians in Presidentially authorized drone strikes that clearly violate international law.
Again, I think this is the way Presidential Findings are supposed to work: to implicate the President deeply enough to ensure he'll protect the CIA for the crimes he asks it to commit.
But it's not the way a democracy is supposed to work.
A big part of Stephen Preston's response to Mark Udall's questions about whether he supports adequate disclosure to Congress consists of insisting the CIA Directors he worked with — Leon Panetta, David Petraeus, presumably Mike Morell as Acting Director, and John Brennan — have supported full disclosure to Congress.
Doing a better job of congressional notification and ensuring the proper provision of information concerning covert action and other intelligence activities to the Intelligence Committees has been a top priority of the Directors under which I have served, starting with Director Panetta, and one that I have fully supported.
What we regard as proper practice today is driven by faithful application of the National Security Act of 1947. It is also informed by the very high priority the Directors under which I have served have placed on doing a better job of congressional notification and ensuring the proper provision of information concerning covert action and other intelligence activities to the Intelligence Committees. To repeat, I have fully supported these efforts and, if confirmed, will be fully committed to such efforts with respect to the Armed Services Committees.
While it may or may not be true that the Directors under whom Preston has served have not engaged in the kind of manipulative briefings that characterized the torture program, every time I read these assurances from Preston I remembered what Barb Mikulski said at John Brennan's confirmation hearing.
Now, I want to get to the job of the CIA director. I'm going to be blunt — and this would be no surprise to you, sir.
But I've been on this committee for more than 10 years. And with the exception of Mr. Panetta, I feel I've been jerked around by every CIA director.
I've either been misled, misrepresented, had to pull information out, often at the most minimal kind of way, from Tenet, with his little aluminum rods to tell us that we had weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to Porter Goss, not worth coming.
You know the problems we've had with torture. The chair has spoken eloquently about it all the way.
And, quite frankly, during those questions, they were evaded, they were distorted, et cetera.
While she didn't name him as she did Tenet and Goss, neither did she except David Petraeus, like she did Leon Panetta.
This would seem to suggest that Mikulski has a very different understanding of Petraeus' commitment to briefing Congress than Preston claims to have.
Jane Mayer has obtained a set of questions Mark Udall made CIA General Counsel Stephen Preston answer before he would release a hold on the latter's confirmation as DOD General Counsel. They address CIA's response to the Senate Intelligence Committee torture report. I will have more to say about these answers later (see also this post from Katherine Hawkins).
But for now I want to point to one of the few questions Preston really didn't answer. While the non-answer is not at all surprising, it does have implications far beyond torture.
Udall noted,
The CIA response to the Committee Study states: "while it would have been prudent to seek guidance from OLC on the complete range of techniques prior to their use, we disagree with any implication that, absent prior OLC review, the use of the 'unapproved' techniques was unlawful or otherwise violated policy."
The comment does two things.
First, it confirms CIA tortured before John Yoo authored memos authorizing that torture.
That confirmation is news, though we've long known it to be true.
But it also reflects CIA's view that the legality of specific torture techniques did not stem from OLC review and authorization of them.
Udall asked Preston,
Please state whether you agree with this legal determination and explain your legal reasoning.
To which Preston responded,
On the particular point raised in (c) of the question, I also agree that CIA should have sought guidance from OLC with regard to the complete range of interrogation techniques prior to their use. I understand the Agency's response to the SSCI's study to acknowledge this point, noting only that failure to so engage with OLC did not, in and of itself, render any given technique unlawful.
Preston doesn't actually say whether he agrees with the Agency's legal determination or not, which was, after all Udall's question. Which gets him out of answering Udall's question about his legal reasoning.
But Preston has, for all intents and purposes, already answered that question in his speech last year on CIA's use of lethal force. In it, he laid out was required for the use of lethal force (he doesn't say it, but this includes lethal force against an American citizen) to be legal under US law.
Let's start with the first box: Authority to Act under U.S. Law.
First, we would confirm that the contemplated activity is authorized by the President in the exercise of his powers under Article II of the U.S. Constitution, for example, the President's responsibility as Chief Executive and Commander-in-Chief to protect the country from an imminent threat of violent attack.
In addition, we would make sure that the contemplated activity is authorized by the President in accordance with the covert action procedures of the National Security Act of 1947, such that Congress is properly notified by means of a Presidential Finding.
As I've noted elsewhere, Preston doesn't even acknowledge the National Security Act's requirement that covert actions be legal under US law.
His speech makes it clear he agrees with the CIA's response on torture. The CIA doesn't need OLC approval for covert operations (which torture was during its early years), the implication seems clear, because the only thing needed to make covert operations legal is Presidential authorization with adequate Congressional notice.
This is a stance that most discussions on drones and torture miss. The CIA doesn't believe it needs OLC memos — whether authorizing belly slaps or the assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki. It may consider it prudent to have OLC authorization in hand, mind you. But it does not believe such authorization gives covert operations any more legal sanction that simply the President's authorization.


text:
- Report: #529421
Report - Rebuttal - Arbitrate
Complaint Review: Dynasty Sales LLC
Dynasty Sales LLC15820 N. 35th Ave. Phoenix, Arizona United States of America
Dynasty Sales LLC Ryan Atkins When I found out my Mother had been scammed in Little Rock, AR by a "Dynasty Sales LLC" claiming to be a company -- I was very angry!! Phoenix, Arizona
*Author of original report: My Mom was a Scam Victim of Dynasty Sales LLC!
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..
Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 11/27/2009 11:24 AM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Dynasty-Sales-LLC/Phoenix-Arizona-85053/Dynasty-Sales-LLC-Ryan-Atkins-When-I-found-out-my-Mother-had-been-scammed-in-Little-Rock-529421. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.
Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Dynasty Sales LLC
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
- Keep the name short & simple, and try different variations of the name.
- Do not include ".com", "S", "Inc.", "Corp", or "LLC" at the end of the Company name.
- Use only the first/main part of a name to get best results.
- Only search one name at a time if Company has many AKA's.
#1 Author of original report
My Mom was a Scam Victim of Dynasty Sales LLC!
AUTHOR: Diane Mayernick - (United States of America)
SUBMITTED: Saturday, November 28, 2009POSTED: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Are you an owner, employee or ex-employee with either negative or positive information about the company or individual, or can you provide "insider information" on this company?
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.


text:
8 Healthy Cake Recipes for Any Occasion
Bonus: Get our newsletter & special offers for free. We will not share or sell your email address. View our Privacy Policy
2 Ingredient Apple Angel Food Cake
By: Kim of Mo'Betta
We are adding the recipe to your Recipe Box.
This was added to your Recipe Box.
Click here to view your Recipe Box.
Amongst simple cake recipes, is there one that is easier to make than 2 Ingredient Apple Angel Food Cake recipe? Here, this recipe has you combining angel food cake mix with a can of apple pie filing - that's it! For extra protein and flavor, incorporate chopped nuts into the cake recipe batter. For this cake mix dessert recipe, just be sure to choose ingredients that fit into your chosen healthy eating plan.
Tags / Related Topics
Your Recently Viewed Recipes
Images from other cooks
Love these recipes? Get MORE delivered to your Inbox – FREE Click Here!
Jun 24, 2016
This sounds so delicious! I can't believe it only takes 2 ingredients to make this. I wonder what the texture is like.
May 31, 2016
This recipe looks interesting. It may be convenient to store these ingredients in your pantry for unexpected company as it looks as if it is easy to assemble when pressed for time. The addition of nuts, especially pecans makes almost every cake taste better.
ctilton5 2514126
Jan 24, 2014
I have also made this (it's good) but must bake at least 30 minutes not 20. Then test in the middle to see if it is done.
shenkin 7257859
Oct 24, 2013
Try mixing a can of unsweetened crushed pineapple (12 oz) instead. It is fantastic!
oumom10966 8036008
Oct 20, 2013
I didn't have apple pie filling, but I did have cherry pie filling. I also had the kind of boxed angel food cake mix that only required water. It made a lovely pink-colored cake. It was an okay cake, I think I will add pecans the next time I make it, if I make it. I am the only one that's tried it so far. Family opinion counts for a lot more than mine. I can also see using coconut shreds and some pineapple chunks in this.
calicokitty 831778 0
Aug 05, 2013
I tried this recipe and it came out tooo sweet. I threw it out. I'm not sure if I misunderstood the instructions. The instructions say to mix the pie filling with DRY cake mix (which means to me NO WATER). I'm not sure if I was supposed to add water (like the box instructions says to do) OR if the pie filling (12-oz) was not large enough. Where did I go wrong?
babarmirza77 44842 75
Mar 25, 2013
Oct 22, 2012
This is fantastic. :)
Aug 13, 2012
I made two of these over the week end of Aug 12. Baked one for 35 minutes it was too long and I burned the edges. Then I made another one-I added about 1/8 cup of apple juice which I used to get all of the good stuff off the sides the can, I cooked for 30 minutes. This one turned out great according to the people in my office. I will be doing this again with a different flavored pie filling. I will rate the second one 5 stars.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Are you sure you would like to report this comment? It will be flagged for our moderators to take action.
Thank you for taking the time to improve the content on our site.
My Recipe Box (0) View »
Something worth saving?
- SAVE your favorite recipes
- ADD personal notes
- GET fast cooking tips
Free eCookbooks
- 11 Easy Soup & Stew Recipes
- 12 Must-See Simple Salad Recipes
- 17 Low-Calorie Recipes: Easy Healthy Recipes for Your Diet
- 27 Easy and Healthy Casserole Recipes For You
- 31 Healthy Easy Recipes for a Slow Cooker Free eCookbook
- Cheap Recipes Made Easy: 25 Healthy Low Cost Recipes
- How to Have Healthy Eating Habits: 7 Healthy Meal Ideas Free eCookbook
- The 27 Essential Heart Healthy Diet Recipes Free eCookbook
- The Best Healthy Breakfast Recipes: 29 Super Easy Breakfast Menus
- The Ultimate List of Healthy Snacks: 40 Healthy Snack Recipes Free eCookbook
Our Newest Recipes & Articles
- Grilled Sweet Tea Chicken
- Slow Cooker Chicken Mole Recipe
- Simple Strawberry Spa Salad
- In a Jiffy Corn Casserole-Revised
- Amazing Apple Pumpkin Cupcakes
- Hawaiian Chicken Sheet Pan Supper
- The Best Guacamole!
- Chocolate Shake Green Smoothie
- Blueberry Bran Muffins
- Mexican Breakfast Burritos


text:
- Report: #783116
Report - Rebuttal - Arbitrate
Complaint Review: Eco Green DryCleaners
Eco Green DryCleaners2503 NW 64 BLVD BOCA RATON, Florida United States of America
Eco Green DryCleaners Harvey Kleinman Refusal to refund deposit of $5000.00 as per contract BOCA RATON, Florida
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..
Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™
I was given 3 different options of getting involved through them. So i chose the lowest level which would required an initial $5,000.00 deposit and then further investment totaling $34,950.00 with the balance being financed through the company. I was told that they would seek and help me with the financing though i told them of my bankruptcy, but they said since i own a house that would not be any problem, but in the event that i do not qualify for financing they would return my full deposit of $5,000.00.
Then they sent me a package which clearly outlined everything that we discussed and a contract which would be ratified upon me sending the $5,000.00 as deposit for a DROP OFF business package C (http://www.ecogreendrycleaning.com/packagec.html).
So upon sending them a Bank check of the $5,000.00, they sent me a receipt indicating and confirming the contract. Then they called me a month and half later saying they could not get financing due to my Credit and implored me to see if i could get a Co-signer or any other sources of funding through family or friends if i was still interested and also mentioned that in event that if i fail they would gladly refund my money in full as per Contract.
After trying to seek help through my friends and family and was unable to, i contacted them and informed them. They then said they would try other avenues, which also failed. Therefore i was fraustrated but waited and then contacted Mr Harvey Kleinman (561 302-5031) numerous times and left so many messages and spoke with him many times. Every time i spoke with him, he promised he would send me my full refund as per contract but failed.
Finally he said that i should send him a formal request for a refund in writing which i did in July 2011 by certified mail and return receipt requested, which was duly receieved and signed for and i got the card as confirmation. Then i still called Mr Kleinman a few more times and then he sent me a check for $1,000.00 in August 2011, for which i called him and acnowleged the receipt but still demanded a full refund which he promised to do. But ever since i have called him numerous times and spoken with him and he keeps making promises but never sent me the balance in full.
I am very fraustrated as i am a widower with 2 children in school for whom i have to pay school fees and also bills that are due . PLEASE HELP ME resolve this issue as i need all my money as per the contract. Thank you very very much..
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 09/29/2011 07:51 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Eco-Green-DryCleaners/BOCA-RATON-Florida-33496/Eco-Green-DryCleaners-Harvey-Kleinman-Refusal-to-refund-deposit-of-500000-as-per-contrac-783116. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.
Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Eco Green DryCleaners
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
- Keep the name short & simple, and try different variations of the name.
- Do not include ".com", "S", "Inc.", "Corp", or "LLC" at the end of the Company name.
- Use only the first/main part of a name to get best results.
- Only search one name at a time if Company has many AKA's.
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.


text:
- Report: #71931
Report - Rebuttal - Arbitrate
Complaint Review: GRW Products - Groupama, Greg Gershaw, Don Clement
GRW Products - Groupama, Greg Gershaw, Don Clement2899 Agoura Road, Suite 310 Westlake, California U.S.A.
GRW Products - Groupama, Greg Gershaw, Don Clement ripoff scam online cargo insurance company won't pay claims Westlake California
*UPDATE Employee: We do not sell the insurance to Groupama, they are the actual Underwriter
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..
Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™
I bought an insurance policy from GRW-Products (Greg Gershman) for $3000.00 of coverage. They took my credit card online and emailed me an insurance certificate from another company (Groupama). I had insured under the fine art and antique category and they charged me $40.00 for the insurance. A week later, the trucking company called and told me that they had completley destroyed both pieces! I am going to send pictures so people can see the extent of the damage. They were not just nicked and scratched, but torn apart and in several peices! Both pieces were over 140 years old and I had sold them to a customer in Florida.
Needless to say, I had to immediately reimburse my customer for his $3000.00 purchase that was destroyed in shipping.
We contacted GRW-Products and they told us that we would have to fill out a claim online. The frieght company had brought the pieces back to us, so we took lots of pictures of the destoryed pieces (I also had before pictures, as I put all my pieces up on my website). We filled everything out and submitted the claim. About 2 weeks later, we recieved a fax from Groupama Insurance.
Conveniently enough, GRW-Products is not really an insurance company, but just a shell that sells the real policies to this Groupama company. Groupama is located in London, so that makes it real convenient to try and deal directly with them - exactly what they are hoping for. The fax we recieved told us that our claim was denied, because they would not pay out for used furniture (I insured my antiques under their fine art category), and also there was a clause "C" that stated that they would only pay out on the claim if the truck was set on fire, in a flood, a war or basically blew up and my antiques were destroyed as a result of that!!
Honestly, the clause was hidden in a lot of laywer fine print and I am still not convinced that it was even on the site when we bought the insurance. Who would buy such insurance? I bought the insurance to protect my pieces in case they were destroyed!
I then called GRW- Products (as they are the ones that took my money, they were the ones that had the website) I talked to Greg Gershman, who is apparently the General Manager of the company. He told me to file avery detailed appeal and he would see what he could do. I spent 3 days putting together a 25 page appeal report and sent it off to him. After talking with my attorney, he told me that is typical stalling tactics with insurance scams. He also told me that because the company is located in California and London and I am located in Illinois, that I would have a hard to filing a lawsuit against them, but we would try the Attorney General Consumer Fraud Division first.
Anyway, back to my appeal - of course this Greg Gershman would not return my phone calls or emails for weeks after that. Finally, I got him on the phone the other day (bear in mind that this has been going on for almost 5 months. He told me that they were not going to pay on the claim, because my antiques were not damaged as a result of the truck blowing up or flooding or war, etc. and that was in the fine print. I gave him a piece of my mind and then came directly to this site to file a rip off complaint. I lost my two antiques that cost me $2000.00 and had to refund my customer $3000.00. I paid $600.00 for the trucking company, who destroyed the pieces and the $40.00 to GRW-Products for the scam insurance poilcy.
I am small business, I work in my gallery 7 days a week and just barely get by, To have something like this happen to me was devistating and it is just so unjust that companies like GRW-Products can get away with ripping off people and there is almost nothing that can be done about it. It can really be a sad world sometimes. There are a lot of people out there willing and able to take advantage. If anyone is thinking of insurance for cargo or freight or household goods, be very careful and read all the fine print (which should not be fine print or deceptive or legal:)
Chicago, Illinois
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 11/14/2003 02:03 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/GRW-Products-Groupama-Greg-Gershaw-Don-Clement/Westlake-California-91361/GRW-Products-Groupama-Greg-Gershaw-Don-Clement-ripoff-scam-online-cargo-insurance-comp-71931. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.
Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on GRW Products - Groupama, Greg Gershaw, Don Clement
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
- Keep the name short & simple, and try different variations of the name.
- Do not include ".com", "S", "Inc.", "Corp", or "LLC" at the end of the Company name.
- Use only the first/main part of a name to get best results.
- Only search one name at a time if Company has many AKA's.
#1 UPDATE Employee
We do not sell the insurance to Groupama, they are the actual Underwriter
SUBMITTED: Monday, December 01, 2003POSTED: Monday, December 01, 2003
Are you an owner, employee or ex-employee with either negative or positive information about the company or individual, or can you provide "insider information" on this company?
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.


text:
Category Archives: Media & Entertainment
OWAA Excellence in Craft Awards
The Outdoor Writers Association of America has announced winners of the association's 2013 Excellence in Craft contest. From blogs and multimedia to newspaper and photo, these are the cream of the crop of outdoor media. Read more in the press … more
Dun Magazine: A New Rise in Fly Fishing
Designed to unify women from around the world with the shared passion of fly fishing, Dun Magazine recently released its first issue. From stories of the Amazon to Tenkara in Japan, to a photo essay and featured new gear, "It … more
Video Hatch: Kimmel and Louis-Dreyfus Talk Fly Fishing
Jimmy Kimmel, host of the late-night talk show "Jimmy Kimmel Live" and himself an avid angler, hosted two guests the past week, Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Ashton Kutcher, also fly fishers. Catch the interviews with these stars talking about their love … more
Low and Clear on iTunes
Called "the best documentary of the year" by Paste Magazine, the highly acclaimed film "Low and Clear," which chronicles a unique journey of friendship and fishing, is now available for rent or purchase on iTunes. Read more in the press … more
Wintertime Blues
It was a long winter, but a group of fifteen fly fishers put the time to good use, creating a collaborative project, Wintertime Blues, complete with "painting, poetry, essays, photography, comedy, drama and etc. and sundry." Edited by Anthony Naples, … more
Costa's "Jungle Fish" Wins Film Award
For its focus on the people and culture of Guyana, Costa Sunglasses film Jungle Fish has received a LightStay Sustainability Film Award from the Sundance Institute and Hilton Worldwide as part of the 2013 Sundance Film Festival, held January 20. … more
Discussion with Greg Thomas
In a desire for an untethered life of hunting and fishing whenever he could, the journalism career of Fly Rod & Reel editor Greg Thomas got its start. And from the state of print magazines to quality writing (or lack … more
Project Healing Waters FT3 Event
The Denver Chapter of Project Healing Waters will hold its main fundraising event April 14th, 2013, with a showing of the Fly Fishing Film Tour at The Wildlife Experience in Parker, Co. Tickets are available at local fly shops. Read … more
Saltwater Media Summit
Recognizing outdoor writers as an important link in connecting conservation managers and work with citizens and lawmakers, the second annual Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TRCP) Saltwater Media Summit was recently held in Sarasota, Florida. While time on the water was … more
Buccaneers and Bones
Buccaneers and Bones has wrapped up filming in the Bahamas and Everglades and is set to kick off its third season. Hosted by Tom Brokaw and featuring the original cast of Michael Keaton, Lefty Kreh, Yvon Chouinard, Bill Klyn, and … more


text:
Adrian Jones bemoans lack of progress in collecting and using data on ethnicity in housing services
Published by traceybignall for Race Equality Foundation in Housing and also in Local Government
Despite forty years of guidance on collecting and using ethnic
monitoring data, social housing providers are still not making
enough use of their data to improve services for black and minority
ethnic tenants and residents. In a recently published Better
Housing briefing paper published by the Race Equality Foundation,
Jones brings together evidence of shortcomings in provider
approaches, that can perpetuate existing ethnic inequalities. For
example, by not analyzing its data and linking it to the impact of
its lettings policy or reports of racial harassment, or the number
of black and minority ethnic staff in senior management
Several examples of good practice are given, covering housing associations and local authorities. For example, he praises Birmingham City Council for analyzing allocations by ethnicity and comparing this to national census and allocations data. The authority also examines waiting list time, choice of area, quality of lettings and refusal rates. This information is then used to directly improve the service. Jones cautions against losing focus on 'race' and ethnicity with the need to collect and use data on other equalities aspects such as age, faith and sexual orientation. The paper contains useful resources and references. You can view Monitoring the ethnicity of housing service users: forty years of progress? by Adrian Jones at:
Third private funding placement for Scotland
Login and comment using one of your accounts...


text:
Reading mode: Light Dark
Sample galleries
Latest reviews
Finished challenges
Most popular cameras
In-depth testingLatest Camera ReviewsBeyond the studio testsFeature Articles and VideosPIX VideosTalks, demos and panels707The Canon that canCanon EOS 80D Review370Touchscreen street shooterFujifilm X70 Review2154Upwardly mobileSony a6300 Review330Power ZoomPanasonic Lumix ZS100/TZ100 Review2487Retro through-and-throughFujifilm X-Pro2 Review423Real-world testThe Sony a6000 goes surfing2197FeatureWhat is equivalence?Return of the Super Rebel?Canon EOS Rebel T6s Reviewrock steadyOlympus OM-D E-M5 II ReviewTwo in oneLG G5 camera review391You'll be impressedShootout: Tamron 15-30 F2.8 vs. Nikon 14-24 F2.8Kirkjufell mountainBehind the Shot: Shredded204Long and short of itTamron 16-300mm F3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD Macro review400Inching forward? Canon PowerShot G5 X Review555Ultra-compactSony Cyber-shot RX1R II review721Bang for the BuckOlympus OM-D E-M10 II Review1608OpinionThe myth of the upgrade path
Top threads
Follow us
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.


text:
More than 11,600 homes in the Beverley and Holderness area remain at risk of flooding, it has been revealed this week.
For 2,154 of those, the risk of flooding is significant.
According to an analysis of Environment Agency data released by Friends of the Earth, there are 306,465 homes at flood risk in Yorkshire and the Humber as a whole.
This includes 44525 homes which have been judged by the Environment Agency to be at significant risk.
A further 1,468 homes are at risk of flooding across the rest of East Yorkshire – 152 of those at significant risk.
Nationally, over 6,000 homes have been affected by the winter floods. However, the figures show there is a much larger number of properties in the UK that could face flooding in future.
This is a concern as climate change is set to make flooding more widespread.
The Government's own Climate Change Risk Assessment estimates almost one million UK homes could be at significant flood risk by the 2020s, up from the 370,000 currently at significant risk nationwide.
Friends of the Earth Yorkshire and Humber Campaigner, Simon Bowens, said: "Flooding is devastating for anyone that is affected by it and as a country we must do much more to prepare for the impacts of climate change. Without proper investment in flood defences, hundreds of thousands more homes could be put at risk of flooding.
"We are asking the region's MPs to support the call for flood defences in line with the risks posed by climate change, and for more investment to make homes energy efficient, switch to renewable energy and get off climate-changing and polluting fossil fuels."
Hull North MP, Diana Johnson said: "It's clear that with so much more of the country now at risk of flooding, due to the rising sea levels and the greater regularity of volatile and extreme weather caused by climate change, we cannot afford to just write off whole communities, businesses and the property markets in large population centres such as Hull if we want to see our economy growing on a sustainable basis."
Selby & Ainsty MP, Nigel Adams said: "Protecting homes is a priority for this Government so I am pleased to see the increased budget for defences."


text:
I am using Page Flip version 0.5.9.8. I have tried uploading images with browser uploader using a small (662x1024 px) and large (1262x1953 px) image, so when zoomed it won't be blurry. However, when I do, WordPress says it is out of memory. I have increased the PHP and WP memory limit to 128M, but I still get an error.
Is there a preferred image format that won't be blurry when zoomed?
Is there a workaround for this memory issue so I can upload both large and small versions of the images?
here's the error I get:
Fatal error: Out of memory (allocated 27525120) (tried to allocate 5048 bytes) in /home/collegia/public_html/a/wp-content/plugins/page-flip-image-gallery/functions.class.php on line 211


text:
The "Dear Abby" of Voodoo answers your questions about New Orleans Voodoo, Hoodoo, Conjure & Spiritualism
Monday, July 7, 2008
What does a Cursed Voodoo Doll Look Like?
You have found an unusual looking doll on your doorstep or in your parking garage at work. You get a creepy feeling just looking at it. Come to think of it, you have had a streak of bad luck lately. Was this doll put there for you to find? Is someone sending you a message on the downlow?
A person who wants to lay a trick on you can use any type of doll they wish. It does not have to be the stereotypical ugly Voodoo doll with some of your personal effects attached to it. Sometimes, it can be as innocent looking as a sweet baby doll that is the object of any little girl's affection.
For example, above is a picture of a Voodoo doll believed to be put in the path of someone at their place of employment. It was strategically placed in the parking lot facing the individual's car. This looks like one of those Brat dolls you can find in any department store. But how would you know it is carrying a curse?
Well, the first clue is rather obvious - her face is painted black. This is a good indication that it is a tool in someone's ritual work. I mean, they don't come with their faces painted black, do they?
Secondly, she has no feet. This is another indication that this doll may have been intentionally tampered with in an attempt to lay a curse on someone. Painting the face black and removing the feet are both consistent with the general principle of using shocking imagery to psych out an intended target. Also, what is done to the doll can be viewed as a metaphor for what is intended for the victim. For example, removing the feet is consistent with restraining and rendering a person immobile.
The doll on the left is another example of a doll that is believed to have been used as a cursed Voodoo doll. In this case, the doll bride was used to represent the daughter-in-law of the the son of the person casting the spell. At first glance, she seems like a beautiful baby doll. But upon closer examination while removing the veil, it became evident that her hair had been clipped off.
Why the hair was clipped off can only be surmised. A healthy head of hair is symbolic of health and youth. Perhaps the perpetrator was jealous of the targeted individual. Maybe she wanted to make her ugly, unhealthy, or remove her femininity. Or maybe she just wanted her hair to fall out. Either one of these are good guesses.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what the focus of a hex or curse is when it comes to Voodoo dolls. This type of magic is extremely metaphorical. Let's take the second doll here as an example. Historically, hair is linked to power, punishment and status. Head shaving was done in concentration camps as a form of punishment and humiliation, and shaving the hair off of a woman has been practiced as a form of punishment for women with long hair, especially. Remember the story of Samson and Delilah? Samson foolishly tells Delilah that the source of his strength is his hair. So what does she do? She tells her servants to shave his hair off. Not only does this make him lose his strength and power, it is a direct violation of an order from God. So God no longer protects him, he is captured buy the Philistines, blinded with hot pokers, and imprisoned. Now that is brutal! But the argument could be made that he deserved it. After all, he was apparently a raging murderous maniac who was no less brutal to dozens of people.
Join the forum at PlanetVoodoo.tv and discuss.
3 comments:
- Pallavi Oraon said...
i also found a doll on my new mansion's basement. But it doesn't look what you explained but the disturbing part was........ her breast and shin wasn't there....... does that mean it's cursed?
- August 7, 2013 at 11:41 AM
- Pallavi Oraon said...
I found a adorable looking doll in my new mansion's basement and i'm confused if it's cursed or not... the disturbing part was... her breasts were removed. is this something to worry about?
- August 7, 2013 at 11:44 AM
- Crystal said...
I found a doll at work it was in a small red back with a white cross stitched in it and inside the bag was something that was smashed up with saran wrap and it had a white and red thread around it and it was in the shape of a doll what does this mean?Is this a Voodoo doll and if so is it good or bad?
- November 13, 2015 at 4:09 PM


text:
- Report: #136909
Report - Rebuttal - Arbitrate
Complaint Review: Consumer Incentive Promotions
Consumer Incentive Promotions14545 J Military Trail #189 Delray Beach, Florida U.S.A.
Consumer Incentive Promotions Ripoff Offers Complete but not acknowledged company refuses to contact back Delray Beach Florida
*Author of original report: Hard work pays off - Received my iBook! Looks like the work everyone shared on this site payed off.
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..
Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™
I have also reported this information to the Florida Attorney General about 3 weeks ago and have not heard any thing back. Most of these offers require monthly membership and some purchases, so I have spent quite abit of money to get a free Ibook that was advertised.
The fact that I have no answer from this company leads me to believe this is a big scam and I wish we could do something about it
Morganville, New Jersey
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 03/30/2005 11:02 AM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Consumer-Incentive-Promotions/Delray-Beach-Florida-33484/Consumer-Incentive-Promotions-Ripoff-Offers-Complete-but-not-acknowledged-company-refuses-136909. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.
Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Consumer Incentive Promotions
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
- Keep the name short & simple, and try different variations of the name.
- Do not include ".com", "S", "Inc.", "Corp", or "LLC" at the end of the Company name.
- Use only the first/main part of a name to get best results.
- Only search one name at a time if Company has many AKA's.
#1 Author of original report
Hard work pays off - Received my iBook! Looks like the work everyone shared on this site payed off.
AUTHOR: Gayle - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Monday, April 18, 2005POSTED: Monday, April 18, 2005
Thanks again.
This is a scam if you don't hunt them down - which unfortunately many probably do not.
Are you an owner, employee or ex-employee with either negative or positive information about the company or individual, or can you provide "insider information" on this company?
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.


text: article Classic Rotation: Snoop Dogg's "Doggystyle" 20 Years Later Nov 23, 2013 at 09:28am In 1993 West coast Hip Hop was at the top of its game. Suge Knight, The D.O.C, and Dr. Dre had formed the now infamous record label Death Row Records. classic rotation 1993 west coast doggystyle Snoop Dogg


text:
15 gal. LLDPE Trash Bags, Flat Pack, Black, 500PK
- Item# 3U828
- Mfr. Model# 3U828
- Catalog Page# N/A
close x
Using 360° Viewing:
- Rotate: Use top-to-bottom, side-to-side by use of mouse arrow.
- Zoom In: Double click on image.
- Zoom Out/Reset: Put photo at full zoom & then double click.
How can we improve our Product Images?
Product is discontinued
Product Details
Most prevalent liner type is great for trash containing sharp objects. Manufactured in a variety of colors, and suitable for a wide range of applications. Puncture- and tear-resistant. Virtually leakproof bottoms.
Technical Specs
- Item Trash Bags
- Capacity 15 gal.
- Color Black
- Material LLDPE
- Width 24"
- Height 32"
- Thickness 0.35 mil
- Seal Star
- Max. Load 15 lb.
- Package Configuration Flat Pack
How can we improve our Technical Specifications?
Compliance and Restrictions
This item is manufactured or supplied by a minority, woman or disadvantaged business.
Alternate Products
Alternate Products may not be identical in style or function to original selection. Please compare below for more information.
Alternate Search Terms
Plastic Bags (2405)
Can Liners (426)
Trash Can Liners (420)
Trash Bags (414)
Garbage Bags (412)


text:
Welcome to Goldendoodle Kennels. San Diego Goldendoodle Breeder
Goldendoodle Kennels, is dedicated to the Goldendoodle breed, and we are located in Southern California, San Diego. We are confident that if an individual or family is looking for a kind, intelligent, easy to care for and live with dog then the Goldendoodle should be at the top of there list. Goldendoodle come in a variety of sizes and colors. Here at Goldendoodle Kennels we specialize in the "smaller" size, sometimes called: "mini", "toy" or "micro-mini". Because the breed is relatively new there are no established "standards" for the breed. Therefore breeders use different "titles" to describe their dogs.
Some refer to "Mini" Goldendoodle to describe Doodles that will range from 25 to 40 lbs when grown and this is arguably true when you consider that a "standard" or "full" sized Doodle ranges between 60 to 80 lbs (sometimes larger).
We carefully select special homes when we have Mini Goldendoodle Puppies for sale. Our Mini Goldendoodle Gallery has many puppy pictures of some of ours and other beautiful Dogs.
From our Blog
Puppies Are Here!
The nursery is full and we have some beautiful puppies. Our Mom's have had different sizes and colors, from the golden tones, to the shiny black and also one with phantom markings. The puppies will be ready for adoption in November.
Do you need someone to be Thankful for?
Remember to get […]
Puppies will be ready to go home in early February 2015
We had new puppies in early December and they will be ready to go home in early February 2015. We have cream colors, phantoms and a couple of all black puppies.
These puppies will be ready to go home 8 weeks after they are born. We have already been […]
Puppies expected Early September
We are taking deposits for our September litters. Get your deposits in to reserve your puppy now. They will be ready to go home in November. If you just cant wait we have one adorable little male left. He is unique in his coloring! Loving sweet spirit , he's had […]
Angelina has new Puppies!
This is the smallest toy Goldendoodle ever!
This is Angelina's second litter. Angelina is our smallest mom. she weighs 9 pounds. The sire is Marco who is 11 pounds. Her first litter she had two little girls. They are full grown now, one is 7 pounds and the other is 9. […]


text:
- Report: #1071421
Report - Rebuttal - Arbitrate
Complaint Review: ACCC Insurance
ACCC InsuranceHouston, Texas USA
ACCC Insurance ACCC General Insurance Terrible service, good luck filing a claim against them.. Houston Texas
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..
Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™
overall terrible service. they will not pay nor answer phone lines. I pray you have an actual accident report, witnesses and photos. And hopefully you were wise enough to get witnesses from the scene. Geting angry wont matter, they will have an attitude from the first phone call, even the supervisors.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 07/30/2013 01:09 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/ACCC-Insurance/Houston-Texas-77003/ACCC-Insurance-ACCC-General-Insurance-Terrible-service-good-luck-filing-a-claim-against-1071421. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.
Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on ACCC Insurance
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
- Keep the name short & simple, and try different variations of the name.
- Do not include ".com", "S", "Inc.", "Corp", or "LLC" at the end of the Company name.
- Use only the first/main part of a name to get best results.
- Only search one name at a time if Company has many AKA's.
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.


text:
Second Bill Burr Pabst show added, Tower of Power and WAR co-headlining Potawatomi
If you were planning to see comedian Bill Burr's set at the Pabst Theater March 8, tickets are just about sold out. The good news is a second show at 9:30 p.m. that evening has been added.
Tickets for that show are $29.50 and go on sale at noon Wednesday at the Pabst Theater box office (144 E. Wells St.), the Riverside Theater box office (116 W. Wisconsin Ave.), by calling (414) 286-3663 and visiting pabsttheater.org. »Read Full Article
Alchemist Theatre's 'King Lear' reigns as family drama
Early in Friday's opening-night performance of Alchemist Theatre's "King Lear," Bo Johnson's aged king called for the map demonstrating his intended division of Britain among his three daughters. Lear's attendants dutifully unfurled it — with the bottom at the top and the top at the bottom. When they tried to hang the map up, it kept falling down.
Director Leda Hoffmann confirmed during intermission that this sequence wasn't planned. But such a topsy-turvy world aptly illustrates the disorder that descends on Britain once the hot-tempered Lear banishes his beloved Cordelia, counting on his remaining two daughters to keep him and Britain safe. »Read Full Article
Check out interactive map of southeast Wisconsin farmers markets
Another beautiful Saturday morning — perfect farmers market weather.
Good thing there are so many of them operating on Saturdays. »Read Full Article


text:
YOU PROBABLY give little thought to the mug that holds your morning cup of joe.
For some, that vessel is a work of art unto itself.
On Thursday morning, the Clay Studio, a gallery and retail space in Old City dedicated to handmade ceramics, hopes to change the way some local coffee drinkers think about their own usual mugs.
During the studio's Guerrilla Mug Assault, volunteers will gather at six secret locations to surprise morning commuters by replacing their usual cup with a one-of-a-kind handmade mug. Five hundred mugs crafted by 50 artists, many from the Philadelphia area, will be given away.


text:
Take a sneak peek at the new NIST.gov and let us know what you think!
(Please note: some content may not be complete on the beta site.).
Cabinet is for the storage of humidity-sensitive items. Cabinet is molded of a clear co-polyester plastic that is resistant to chemical attack and blocks 99% of UV light. A door mounted hygrometer permits tracking of RH. Preset electronically controlled desiccant regeneration eliminated need to monitor desiccant.
Specifications / Capabilities:
Name: Stacey Cochiara