text:
North Carolina Department of Justice
Sign Up for Alerts
Contact Us
I am a:
Business Owner
Job Seeker
Law Enforcer
Military Person
College Student
Top Issues
News Alerts
Protect Yourself
Help for Victims
About DOJ
Top Issues
News & Events
News Releases & Advisories
Related Information
News Search
Consumer Columns
Protect Yourself
Help for Victims
About DOJ
print page
email this
News & Events
News Releases & Advisories
Operation Medicine Drop collects nearly 8 million pills in one week
Operation Medicine Drop collects nearly 8 million pills in one week
Release date: 4/3/2012
Local law enforcement held more than 230 events across NC to fight prescription drug abuse
More than 7.7 million doses of old prescription and over-the-counter drugs were collected across North Carolina during Operation Medicine Drop held March 17-24, breaking previous records, Attorney General Roy Cooper announced today.
"North Carolinians turned in more unused drugs than ever before, keeping them out of the hands of those who could abuse or misuse them," Cooper said.
Operation Medicine Drop aims to cut down on prescription drug abuse and environmental damage by encouraging people to properly dispose of old drugs that are no longer needed. Cooper, the State Bureau of Investigation, local law enforcement agencies, Safe Kids North Carolina, and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration sponsored more than 230 prescription drug take-back events in 71 counties across North Carolina last week during National Poison Prevention Week.
The Cary Police Department led the collections with 875,000 doses of prescription and over-the-counter drugs. The Union County Sheriff's Office collected 619,000 doses and the Fayetteville Police Department collected 290,920 doses.
A Wake County-area department collected 50 Fentanyl patches, one of the deadliest painkillers when abused. Another site collected a pint of liquid morphine from 1985 and a bottle of baby nose drops from 1952.
Safely disposing of old medications through Operation Medicine Drop events instead of flushing them down the drain prevents chemicals from ending up in the water supply.
The SBI gathered the drugs collected by local law enforcement and delivered them to a North Carolina Division of Environment and Natural Resources approved incinerator in Alamance County for safe destruction. The North Carolina Highway Patrol assisted in transporting the drugs.
Nationwide, fatal drug overdoses are now the leading cause of death due to unintentional injury, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. Prescription and over-the-counter medications cause more than three-fourths of all unintentional poisonings in North Carolina, according to the N.C. Division of Public Health, and approximately 1,000 people died in North Carolina last year from overdosing on prescription drugs.
The intentional abuse of prescription pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants and sedatives to get high is a growing concern, particularly among teens. Among people ages 12-17, prescription drugs are now the second most abused drug, behind marijuana.
"Prescription drugs are on their way to becoming the most abused drug by young people, and most young people get access to prescription drugs at their home or a friends' home," Cooper said. "Cleaning out your medicine cabinets can help protect kids from abuse and the dangers of overdose."
To educate young people about the dangers of prescription drug abuse, Cooper is partnering with the National Association of Drug Diversion Investigators, the North Carolina Association of Pharmacists, and the Governor's Institute on Substance Abuse to sponsor a student video competition that runs from March 26 through April 20.
The student whose video is judged to be the best will win an Apple iPad, and the runners-up will receive an iPod Touch and an iTunes gift card. The winning video will also be featured on the website for the NC Department of Justice.
More details including the contest rules and application are available at www.ncdoj.gov. Information on the contest has also been sent to high school principals statewide.
Contact: Noelle Talley, (919) 716-6413
North Carolina Department of Justice / Josh Stein, Attorney General (919) 716-6400
Site Map
Site Feedback
Legal Information/Privacy
Employee Portal


text:
Charm Necklaces
- Overview
Add a lovely birthstone bead to one of our handmade initialed pendants for a personalized charm necklace that she'll love.
- 14–16" long
- Adjustable sterling silver cable chain with lobster clasp.
- Sterling silver charms are accompanied by a silver pendant, and accented with a colorful bead.
- Choose the color of your bead according to your birth month.
- Presented in an elegant box that's ready to wrap and give.
- Dimensions & Care
- Chain: 14–16" long
- Pendant: 0.75" long
- Charm: 0.75" long
- Bead: 4mm diameter
- Polish occasionally with a sterling silver polishing cloth.
- Shipping & Return Info
This item ships directly from our manufacturer within 2-3 weeks of your order.
This item is only available to customers within the 50 United States.
This is a special order item.
View Our Shipping Information
Return Policy
At Pottery Barn Kids, we take great pride in the quality and craftsmanship of our products. Attention to design, materials, safety and construction is our priority. We carefully inspect your order prior to shipment; upon receipt, please inspect your purchase and notify us of any damage. We will arrange for a prompt replacement. If, within 7 days for Quick Ship upholstery and 30 days for all other products, you are dissatisfied for any reason, you may return your purchase for a refund of the merchandise value.
If your return for Merchandise Credit Cards is greater than $10,000, we will issue $10,000 in Merchandise Credit Cards to you that day, and then mail additional Merchandise Credit Card(s) for the amount in excess of $10,000 to you.
We cannot accept returns on monogrammed, personalized, special-order items, or on items damaged through normal wear and tear. We also cannot accept returns of final-sale items, which are identified by a price that ends in $0.99.
For returns of items purchased from your Pottery Barn Kids registry, we will gladly provide a refund or exchange for the merchandise within 90 days of your event or within 90 days of purchase, whichever date is later.
For assistance, please contact Customer Service at 800.993.4923
International Returns: Online returns are available only for items that were shipped to the United States. If you would like to return items that were shipped outside the US, please see International Returns and Exceptions.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
This photo was tweeted by Cam Williams today...
"Linebackers after the toughest workout of the winter"
Left to right...Curtis Grant, David Perkins, Luke Roberts, Ryan Shazier, Cam Williams, Joe Burger, ? Fada (walk on) (Josh Perry and Jamal Marcus not in the pic...Marcus may be working with the DL these days). Grant's 2012 is a good example of how a great physique doesn't always translate to a great football player, but you can understand why they still have high hopes for him and Perkins, among others. Huge. Shazier played at 226 last year, and he looks like the runt of the litter.
https://twitter.com/CamrenWilliams5/sta ... 56/photo/1


text:
iHerb Customer Reviews
Savings of: £0.21 (4% off)
Excellent product and cost
Posted by Reviewer2335857 on Jan 19, 2008
Received my order in a timely fashion. Brown rice syrup individually bubble wrapped and placed into a zip lock bag as added insurance against leakage. Price was good and I would reorder again
Excellent Product
Posted by Reviewer1043043 on May 21, 2008
Great Flavor,, Great price and Gluten Free!!! What more could you want!!
Posted by Reviewer1231231 on Jun 18, 2008
Great product. Can't live with out!!
Sweet..but not too sweet
Posted by Reviewer3300577 on Jun 18, 2008
This is a pleasant change from sugar, honey or Equal...fro coffee and cooking.
Great stuff - very yummy
Posted by Reviewer2947180 on Jul 01, 2008
Liked the brown rice syrup a lot. It tastes wonderful. Thanks!
Lundberg, Sweet Dreams, Brown Rice Syrup, Gluten Free 1lb 5oz
Posted by Reviewer2074358 on Oct 20, 2008
I used this as a substitute for molasses in a GF Pumpkin Bread recipe and the result was OUTSTANDING!! Very moist, incredibly delicious!! It gets rave reviews every time I make it; people can't believe it's GF!! In all fairness have never made the recipe w/ molasses because I HATE the bitter taste of molasses, so I don't know how it would have come out in terms of texture had I done so, but this was such an AMAZING substitute that I don't care ;-). I may try substituting it in recipes that call for agave nectar to see how it works out. Finding this on iherb has been a dream - WAY cheaper than my local health food store!!!!
Posted by Reviewer1166405 on Sep 27, 2008
Great value!!
like the product
Posted by Reviewer1642308 on Sep 29, 2008
I have been using this product for a while and I really like it. Taste great and it is better than corn syrup and it has a low glyciemic index for diabetic.
subsitute for honey
Posted by Reviewer1617526 on Nov 09, 2009
I found that the brown rice syrup was a good replacement for honey in baking. It is also good anywhere I need to use syrup.
Posted by Reviewer2462297 on Nov 23, 2009
using this product to make all natural cookie bars and it fits the bill all around.


text:
Lotus' Budget Baller guide for just starting out
Posted 20 April 2012 - 10:50 PM
The first thing people new to paintball should understand is that if you stay with it, the cost of playing far exceeds the cost of your starting gear. When you consider the true cost of playing, it can be staggeringly expensive. The gas to get you there, food, drink and the miscellaneous stuff like batteries and microfiber cloths can really add to the traditional expenses of paint and entry. Don't forget to include these factors when considering the true cost of paintball. This shit is expensive, but below are my recommendations for what you can do and how to keep costs down.
On Renting Gear
Renting is actually a very good option. Most rental packages that I have seen start at around $35 and include the field fee and all day air with them. Considering a field fee and all day air is usually $15-20 already, that means renting only costs you $15-20 per time, which when you factor in the other costs is not big. If you were to purchase your own cheapo setup (which is in most cases inferior to rental setups in all aspects except mask and cleanliness) you would have to play at least 8 times before you even began to come out even. Plus most people do not stick with a setup like that long and there is no resale. I strongly recommend renting. Renting is not throwing away money. That extra $15 every time is preventing you from buying a $150-$250 setup that you're not likely to use for long because either 1) You quit paintball or 2) You kept with paintball and decided you needed better than sub-standard gear. Please rent! Don't buy your own gear (except for a mask). I can't emphasize this enough.
What should I buy to start with?
That's a difficult question. There are two big things you need to ask yourself: am I going to stick with it and what's my budget?
If you're not sure that you're going to stick with it and/or your budget is sub $150, there is only one piece of equipment I recommend you start with: a Mask. Picking a mask can be very tricky as much of it comes down to personal preference. The cheapest mask currently available that I would consider purchasing is the Invert Helix mask with a thermal lense. After that your options become VForce Profiler ($70), and then the $100 super-masks. For newbies I would stay away from the JT line, period. Do not touch, not even the ProFlex (which is actually what I currently use). It's not for most people. You would then rent the rest. With your own mask and renting, you will save money over buying your own cheap-o setup and actually be using better gear on the field. It's a win-win.
If you're sure you're going to stick with it and/or your budget is around $300, you're in a weird sort of limbo. You cannot yet hit that critical point where buying your own setup is better than the rental setup without wasting money on throw-away pieces of shit like CO2 and a Grav Fed loader, but yet you can afford more than the first option. I personally would just let that money burn a hole in my pocket rather than spending it immediately. Having the reserves to be able to go play paintball when you want to is a great feeling. However if you must, then I would pick up a mask (this time a minimum VForce Profiler), a hopper (Invert Halo TOO or used V2 Prophecy (not Z2, but V2s are great and reasonably priced used right now), and a brand new 68/4500 Carbon Fiber Tank of your choice (my choice is a Ninja for $150 or a generic/universal one for $110). Then you rent essentially just the marker. At this point you could buy a throwaway marker for ~$75-$90, but again you'd have to use that marker around 5 times before even breaking even on renting, so if it were me I'd just rent.
If you're sure you're going to stick with it and your budget is around $450, congratulations! You've hit Lotus' desired minimum for purchasing your first full setup! Anything below this price point would leave you missing out on something major, but luckily a great setup can be had for $450. Here's what I would purchase: VForce Profiler ($70), Generic/Universal 68/4500 tank ($110), Invert Halo TOO ($70), and a GoG eNVy ($200, but if at all possible get the eXTCy for $250). If you can go used, it gets even better, but that's beyond the scope of this post. You no longer have to rent, and you are now responsible for all your own gear. This is the critical point, and I really mean that. Don't attempt to buy a full setup if you can't at least get the items described here.
More than $450: start looking into the eventual necessary gear expenses you may not be aware of. Do not start buying more expensive gear yet like the Planet Eclipse Etha or Empire Axe. The eventual necessary gear is far more important once you hit the critical point of gear as described in the $450 section.
Eventual Necessary Gear Expenses You May Not Be Aware of:
In addition to the What Should I Start With there are a few purchases you'll need to make when playing paintball. Here they are:
Gearbag- almost anything will do. For years I used a $15 large plain duffel bag and a smaller $10 gym bag together. The duffel bag for my clothes, marker case etc, the gym bag for my hopper, tank, and tools.
Tools & Lube- Depending on your marker purchase you may already have these. If not, picking these up is absolutely essential
Pod Pack & Pods-not everyone needs this, but the vast majority do. I used to recommend the NXE TP series, but basically anything cheap and of that style will work. Don't forget the pods.
Cleats- be they cleats or hiking boots, buying a pair is very recommend. Usually baseball/soccer cleats are recommended, but if you're looking for something for woodsball only and with ankle support, football cleats will work too. Boots aren't so great here, but are passable. Cheap is fine. I used $20 wal-mart cleats for a while.
Paintball Pants- again, not everyone needs this, but the vast majority do. If you do anything that puts your ass or legs on the ground, you're going to want paintball pants. For the cheap side, I've had great experiences with Proto. Always buy the oldest model year you can find that's still in stock in your size as they make little changes year to year, yet older years are significantly cheaper. I got my 2-year old Proto Pants brand new for $50. I hear Empire/Invert make good pants too. I wouldn't touch Valken.
Microfiber Cloths- are absolutely necessary. Can be found in the automotive section of Wal-Mart for cheap (like sub $5) or sometimes even your local grocery store.
Batteries- don't forget to stock up. Energizer/Duracell only. This is not the place to skimp.
Elbow Pads & Knee Pads- these would be the last items on my list to be honest. You don't actually need them, but they make playing much more enjoyable. Plus you can't really do lots of the speedball dives without them. Or at least you can't if your form isn't perfect or the grass isn't perfect.
Common "Budget" Item Traps You Should Avoid
This may be a controversial segment as this will contain pretty much what the majority will recommend to budget players. Here's the thing: renting is your friend. In case I haven't already made myself clear, buying your own gear that is only equal to the rental gear will take you several paintball trips to even break even. The common pitfall trap for budget minded people is buying gear that is only marginally better than rental gear. Let me give you an example. A 48/3000 Steely tank is a common budget trap. I would never buy one. Why? Because while functional, you're going to want to replace it should you stick with paintball, and there is absolutely no resale on it. If you buy a steely, and then decided a month or two later you want to buy a 68/4500 because it holds over twice as much air and weighs less, you've just wasted that original $50 for the steelie. That's not budget friendly, and in fact a complete waste. For only ~$60 more you could have bought a generic 68/4500 Carbon Fiber Tank with a 5 year Hydro test date. That money will never be wasted. If you decide to quit, the Carbon Fiber tank actually has resale (~60-70) so even then you come out ahead. You should never buy a steely because the Carbon Fiber tank works out better every time. Here is the full list of mediocre items that I would never consider buying:
Spyder/Spyder Clone
Tippmann/Tippmann Clone (seriously)
Steely Tank
Any loader worse than the Invert Halo TOO
any mask worse than the VForce Profiler (note: only exception is for the Invert Helix if you're not sure you want to stick with paintball)
Any pod pack worse than the NXE TP Series
Almost Anything Mil-Sim or Tactical. The markers are always based on a cheaper alternative that functions the same, and most of the time that also falls into this category. To stretch your dollar the farthest, stay away from bling features.
Okay, I am settled on my gear and know I'm sticking with it, now what?
First, always bring your own food and water. Nothing sucks more than being thirsty at a field and not wanting to pay that $2 for a drink, then buying it anyway, downing it, and finally still being thirsty because it's a tiny bottle. Bring your own refreshments. Always. I personally just buy those gallons of purified tap water from my local grocery store. They're cheap, portable, and they'll last the whole day. Also, when you buy your paint, there are two approaches. 1) Buy only a single bag (500) and use only a single bag. This is only for people who have great trigger control. I use to do it all the time, and even have paint left over, and hell I was using an Etek with a Pinokio and 68/4500 at the time. This option is for those who pick and choose their shots, not just pump players. The other option is to always buy by the case. You get a price break when you do that. Even if you don't use all the paint, you save it for next time and bring it back. Make sure you store it in a good climate controlled location, rotate it weekly, and keep it sealed air-tight. The last recommendation is to buy a field pass. This is only for those who want to play regularly at the same location. This combined with trigger control, bringing your own refreshments, buying by the case and keeping your paint, can lead you to play for literally $15 + gas money to get there per day. If you're only opening a single bag, don't have to pay the field fee, then you're a true budget baller. This is how you can play every weekend for an entire month and spend less than that one guy (you know who I'm talking about) does in a single day of paintball. Again, it's very important that you pick and choose your shots, have a field pass, and keep your old paint. Don't just waste it at the end of the day. Remember, the field pass is only worth it if you use it all the time. I bought a 6 month pass for $75, and so I didn't even break even until the 5th trip. Why was it worth it? Because in those 6 months I went at least 15 times, all for either a case of paint about every third of the time, or free (plus gas money and the $1.50 gallon jug of water).
Always Remember, Paintball is Expensive
If you don't like what you're reading here, there's a good chance paintball may not be for you. If you're not sure, rent. I can't stress how important buying just your own mask and renting is. "But Lotus! Rental Gear sucks!1!1!" No it doesn't. When I was on my previous team which was sponsored by a field, I would play at that field with their rental equipment because I wanted to be a part of a newbie friendly atmosphere. Yes I used my own mask (and paintball pants and pads), but the marker, hopper, and tank were all rental. It didn't matter. Being able to use my own mask (and it was a great mask too) made all the difference. So please, when in doubt, rent. Can't meet the $450 critical point, rent. Please rent!
Posted 21 April 2012 - 07:14 AM
Great looking guide and thank you for this part especially!
Here is the full list of mediocre items that I would never consider buying:
Spyder/Spyder Clone
Tippmann/Tippmann Clone (seriously)
Steely Tank
Any loader worse than the Invert Halo TOO
any mask worse than the VForce Profiler (note: only exception is for the Invert Helix if you're not sure you want to stick with paintball)
Any pod pack worse than the NXE TP Series
Almost Anything Mil-Sim or Tactical. The markers are always based on a cheaper alternative that functions the same, and most of the time that also falls into this category. To stretch your dollar the farthest, stay away from bling features.
InB4 milsim and tippy fans, *flame retardant vest
Posted 24 April 2012 - 08:07 PM
Posted 25 April 2012 - 09:16 AM
Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:46 PM
Posted 27 April 2012 - 10:10 AM
Posted 27 April 2012 - 12:02 PM
Posted 27 April 2012 - 02:44 PM
Edited by Empire91, 27 April 2012 - 02:44 PM.
Posted 27 April 2012 - 03:22 PM
Why does everyone hate on steelies?
Idk, i dont like them, i can speak for me, their a better buy in my opinion.
Posted 27 April 2012 - 03:32 PM
Posted 27 April 2012 - 08:20 PM
Yea I wonder, people do use 13/3000 tanks yea know. Mainly pumpers though like you Empire
Why does everyone hate on steelies?
See my about me for useful things like feedback!
Posted 27 April 2012 - 08:44 PM
Posted 27 April 2012 - 08:57 PM
Here is the full list of mediocre items that I would never consider buying:
Spyder/Spyder Clone
Tippmann/Tippmann Clone (seriously) I agree with this part.
Steely Tank Ok, so for a budget baller, 60 dollars is something that could go towards something more important like a better mask. The weight difference isn't that great, and it's not like you're going to see any difference in shot quality. I've never seen a player do exceedingly better when using a Carbon Fiber tank over a steely.
Any loader worse than the Invert Halo TOO An argument could be made for a revvy, but I'll leave that one alone.
any mask worse than the VForce Profiler (note: only exception is for the Invert Helix if you're not sure you want to stick with paintball) I know this is what Mike says, and I try to stay away from quoting his opinions, but the V-Force ProVantage is a great mask for a budget baller. It offers great protection, and isn't uncomfortable by any means. The difference in price is about 30 dollars.
Any pod pack worse than the NXE TP Series Nothing wrong with this.
Almost Anything Mil-Sim or Tactical. The markers are always based on a cheaper alternative that functions the same, and most of the time that also falls into this category. To stretch your dollar the farthest, stay away from bling features. Totally agree.
Edited by Empire91, 27 April 2012 - 08:57 PM.
Posted 27 April 2012 - 09:03 PM
Uh reasons i dont like the steely's:
- Weight (When your tank weighs more then your gun it adds alot of imbalance and stresses your guns frame and asa and the tanks regulator)
- Cheap ones are cheap for a reason (Had two of mine crap out on the same day forcing me to stop playing)
- They dont look as cool
Posted 27 April 2012 - 09:13 PM
Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:29 AM
Bringing your own gear is about 30 bucks and includes all day air. Paint is 10 bucks cheaper if you sign up for their 5 dollar card also (25 dollar case of bronze)
So I'd go against the grain and say if your field charges you that much and has a shitty set up, just buy your own gear even if it is cheap. It will be 100 times better then renting.
Posted 03 May 2012 - 10:24 AM
As for the steel tank, I think you'll find my arguments already written above. It's not something I'd ever recommend because it really does limit you. I have a friend with a 50/4500 and a Geo2 and his air is a limiting factor in the amount of paint he can bring onto the field. That carbon fiber tank of his holds more than 50% extra air over a typical 47/3000 steely. If he had a steely, he would not be able to play paintball the way he wants to, and to me that is where I draw the line. The setup I recommended: Extcy, Invert halo TOO, Carbon Fiber Tank, and VForce Profiler are all functional at even the top levels of tournament play. They may have some minor disadvantages like weight and ergonomics compared to the superguns, but you can ball with the best of them with that setup. That cannot be said for a steely tank. Then consider that a Carbon Fiber tank doesn't incur any extra net cost compared to a Steely and you realize why I don't advocate steel tanks. Yes carbon fiber tanks are $50-60 more expensive than steel tanks, but they also have at least that value in extra resale, wherease steelies do not. Their net cost is no more than a Steely tank. Remember, paintball is expensive. You can't think about it solely in terms of initial gear purchases. It's so much more complicated than that. It's economics after all. I honestly feel that a Carbon Fiber tank is better in every way compared to a Steely. If you can't find that extra $50 when purchasing your gear, you shouldn't be making that purchase to begin with.
Posted 03 May 2012 - 10:54 AM
Silly agglet, looking cool is an illusion. And what two tanks were you using?
They were some cheap 48/3000 guerillas
Posted 03 May 2012 - 10:56 AM
Silly agglet, looking cool is an illusion. And what two tanks were you using?
They were some cheap 48/3000 guerillas
I had the guerrilla air one a long time ago, and I cross threaded the screws and it got stuck in my asa But GA sent me a new one, which was nice.
Posted 03 May 2012 - 01:19 PM
Posted 03 May 2012 - 02:17 PM
Mask: V Force ProVantage 34.00$--------------V Force Profilers 70.00$
Tank: Guerrilla Air 62/3000 40.00$--------------Standard Empire 68/4500 140.00$
Total: 74.00$------------------------------------------------210.00$
That's money that can be put towards other things. And since the people that would be looking at buying this are on a budget, it's safe to say that they won't be shooting massive amounts of paint. A 68/3000 tank can get about 840 shots when using an average efficient gun. Granted, a 68/4500 can get around 1,200 but honestly, what budget baller is going to be shooting over half a case per game? That wouldn't be practical. So, aside from being a bit heavier, I don't see how for a budget baller you can say the steely will be less advantageous than the CF tank.
Edited by Empire91, 03 May 2012 - 02:18 PM.
Posted 03 May 2012 - 03:00 PM
Net cost is factoring in resale. It doesn't exist for steelies, it does for carbon fiber. It's all clearly explained in English in my previous posts.
You have your view of budget and I have mine. I believe you are giving poor advice considering paintball is an amazing game that people generally like to stick with, and therefore initial purchases actually are almost inconsequential compared to the continual expenses of field fees, paint, gas, food, and whatnot. Again that's also explained in the post. I can run the math for you if you'd like to show you just how small of an expense it is proportionally, and yet it makes a significant and noticeable difference on the field.
Again the biggest waste of money and most non-budget thing to do is to replace gear with "upgrades." That's why I'll never advise anyone buying something that they'll want to change later. I will always advise them to hit that critical point of performance.
edit: You want someone to skimp on a mask, really?
Someone is spending hundreds of dollars on a setup, and therefore hundreds of dollars on regular expenses like field fees, gas, paint, etc, and you recommend they save $35 to skimp on their mask? The single most important item they own?
Edited by Lotus, 03 May 2012 - 03:10 PM.
Posted 03 May 2012 - 04:10 PM
Having 50% more air is 50% more shots. If you do the math, a 68/4500 carbon fiber tank actually holds over twice as much air and therefore twice as much shots as a 48/3000 tank. It's math. The only reason I said slightly over 50% was because I was comparing a 50/4500 to a 48/3000.
Net cost is factoring in resale. It doesn't exist for steelies, it does for carbon fiber. It's all clearly explained in English in my previous posts.
You have your view of budget and I have mine. I believe you are giving poor advice considering paintball is an amazing game that people generally like to stick with, and therefore initial purchases actually are almost inconsequential compared to the continual expenses of field fees, paint, gas, food, and whatnot. Again that's also explained in the post. I can run the math for you if you'd like to show you just how small of an expense it is proportionally, and yet it makes a significant and noticeable difference on the field.
Again the biggest waste of money and most non-budget thing to do is to replace gear with "upgrades." That's why I'll never advise anyone buying something that they'll want to change later. I will always advise them to hit that critical point of performance.
edit: You want someone to skimp on a mask, really?
Someone is spending hundreds of dollars on a setup, and therefore hundreds of dollars on regular expenses like field fees, gas, paint, etc, and you recommend they save $35 to skimp on their mask? The single most important item they own?
You're comparing two extremely different tanks. I don't see the logic in comparing a 48 ci tank to a 68 ci tank. Of course you'll get more shots off the 68. You'd get more shots off a 68/4500 even when comparing it to 48/4500. And you're not doubling the pressure, you're increasing it by a third. Unless 3,000 X 2 now equals 4500.
If people stick with the sport like you suggest later, then why would net cost factor in at all then? If they're budget ballers, chances are they're not whoring around gear. So if they keep playing with a tank, and keep getting it hydro tested, they shouldn't have a problem with trying to sell it because they will never need to. After you play with a steely for a couple of games, the weight doesn't even come into effect. You're not going to pick up a CF tank after playing with an aluminium one and increase your skill so much as to say, "wow, I really need a Carbon tank now."
Increasing your initial investment only decreases the amount of money you are able to spend on playing the game itself. So if you spend an extra I don't know, 300 dollars, well then that's 6 maybe seven cases of paint you could have bought, but instead, you went for minimal performance increases. Paintball is fun, but it's not fun when you have all that fancy new gear but no money to actually go out and play.
So when they get their 200 dollar Extcy, they're not going to want to change it shortly down the road? Like say, put the Blackheart board in it?
Where did I say skimp on a mask? Unless you are in some way insinuating that the ProVantage is a shitty mask? First question is, have you ever used one? Because if you haven't, then how are you even qualified to comment on it? Second thing is, the ProVantage offers the same benefits from any of the other masks out there. There's a quick change lens system, it comes with a visor, thermal lenses are available. (It doesn't come with them, but neither do the Profilers) It doesn't fog, and it provides plenty of protection for even people with big faces without being too bulky. Why spend the extra 35 dollars when you have a mask that is just as capable.
Posted 03 May 2012 - 06:45 PM
I mean, if you want HPA and you can't afford Carbon Fiber, they work just as well. They're just a little heavier.
Because exactly that, they're a cheap gateway into a real CF tank. Then you either have a $60 tank laying around or you sell it for $20.
I saw some crazy shit at the field last weekend. We always split up beginners and regulars so they don't get over shot. Well a lot of the kids with entry level electros wanted to go with the beginner group because theyve only played once or twice in their life.
I liked that you emphasized on the will to keep playing. Paintball's a huge investment, and it's not worth it for just a year or two of play.
Posted 03 May 2012 - 08:24 PM
With regards to the mask, that's the one thing I recommend a splurge on. It's your mask. The single most important piece of equipment you own. Adequate isn't good enough in my opinion. A VForce ProVantage is fine for someone in my first categry (the sub $150 or doesn't know if they want to stick with it), but I wouldn't recommend that mask for someone who is going to stick with paintball for a very long time. Again, skimping on a mask is not something I ever condone, unless you're in group #1. And yes, the VForce ProVantage is not the best mask. It's skimping. Hell even the manufacturer acknowledges that.
The GoG G1 is there because it's only a net extra cost of $15 when you get the blackheart board down the road, and you end up with a marker basically equivalent to the extcy. If that's the difference between renting and not, well at that point using it just once pays for itself and with zero downside. The same cannot be said for the examples you are giving out.
All of this is easily spelled out in the original post. The setup you describe is functional, yes. An Azodin Blitz with an Invert Halo TOO, VForce ProVantage, and 48/3000 tank isn't actually something I would mind using on the field. I'd be glad to, but only for specific situations. However this is for budget ballers. At that level I'd rather just save money and rent until I could reach my critical point. If you don't stick with it, then you wasted money. If you do, every paintball player I've met with a setup like that is always talking about what they want to "upgrade" and that's definitely not budget friendly. Again, this is all in the original post.
Also, with regards to tank capacity, do math. 4500 divided by 3000 is 1.5, not 1.33. 4500 is 50% more than 3000. Also I am well aware that comparing a 68 to a 48 may not be strictly fair, which is why in my original example I compared it to a 50/4500. Even so, I still believe it to be valid as those are the typical sizes. Most people buying steel tanks get 48/3000, and most people buying carbon fiber tanks get 68/4500.
I don't like repeating myself, especially when all of these responses can be predicted by simply reading my original post.
Edited by Lotus, 03 May 2012 - 08:28 PM.
Posted 03 May 2012 - 08:28 PM
Also, that's my bad on the math. I'm on pain pills from a root canal, but I shouldn't be that dumb.
Edited by Empire91, 03 May 2012 - 08:34 PM.
Posted 04 May 2012 - 10:18 AM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


text:
The 63rd session of the United Nations General Assembly opened on September 16, 2008. World leaders are preparing to deliver remarks at the United Nations in the coming weeks. You have been given a slot among them to speak at the podium.
What message would you deliver at the United Nations General Assembly?
Joe in Tennessee writes:
What Chief Joseph stated to his people:
"We shall be one people or we will all perish."
Very simple...
This may seem at odds with my postings; but in essence, it is only related to what the UN represents. It is the table on which the worlds problems are attempted to be resolved and this should be the premise for all decisions made.
SNP in Syria writes:
In these present world crises, humanitarian, financial, economical, ecological, and political, the U.N., its real hidden leadership and its puppets regimes are not the solution to mankind problems, they are the problems.
A New World Order, run by a World Congress, its members elected from the people to safeguard the world's people, nations and tribes is past due and must be established no later than 2017. SNP will be the catalyst and shall lead the way for the establishment of this just and progressive global body that under, every member shall be equal. It is then, when humanity will begin its journey out of the evil past, rules by evil and sinister Ammonite entity and onto the glorious millenniums filled with justice, light, achievements and progress. Man, will no longer live like the beasts as those sinister entities intended and planned for millennia's past, but as humans at par with others in intelligence and advancements and exceeds the evil ones in moral and spiritual capacity.
Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:
Ladies and Gentlemen:
You have failed to stop a single war anywhere.
You have failed to end a single dictatorship anywhere. Except for your own tax-free salaries, you have failed to end world poverty anywhere.
Except for your own dinner parties, you have failed to end world hunger anywhere.
America is bankrupt; we can't pay for this anymore.
Now go home.
We are done here.
Eric in New Mexico writes:
(as prepared)
Mr. Secretary General, Mr. President, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen: Thank you for the privilege of being here.
As a member of one of America's first nuclear families, these subjects I touch upon are unavoidably personal. My granddad did his job during a time of war and helped end it. Family duty being what it is, I must follow through. Much is at stake.
In my granddad's day, some of his fellow scientists at Los Alamos had a "betting pool" going before the Trinity test as to how large the resulting explosion (in kilotons of TNT) would be. Anyone present here care to guess how many "Los Alamos's" there are today on the planet? How much Gross National Product is invested to create weapons that cannot ever again be used, and remain civilized?
I stress here the biggest "what if?" is what we might have accomplished as the Human species had nations chosen to live in peace, instead of fear of coexistance after WW2.
Anyone here who has witnessed the birth of one's child can say that yes indeed you created your own reality as parents. The question is what do we wish to create for ourselves as reality on this planet, now and for our children's, and their children's future? Not just in my country, but the world as a whole, as an international vision.
Humanity has lived so long with the reality of imminent destruction that we've become numb to it. Shoving it far from concious thought in order to live "normal" lives. But the unconcious and unintended sociological manifestations have been apparent to anyone willing to see the stark truth.
Inherently, change is viewed with suspicion as a threat to culture and ways of tradition and ethical belief systems. As this applies to developing countries in this nuclear age, the post-cold war aftermath presents a vast paradox that present no easy solutions and has culminated in the reality of the war on terrorism as it exists today. The threat of WMD in the hands of state sponsors of terrorism and their extremist cohorts is not one that civilization and rule of law can abide by. Nor can anyone call themselves a responsible nuclear power in the same breath, for the reality in creating potential self extinction of humanity is truly the definition of collective insanity.
When I consider the difference (by definition) between a terrorist and a freedom fighter, The targeting of civilians and the methods employed serve as self evident. The philosophy behind our revolution, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence, was born from resistance to oppression with "live free, or die." being at the core of it. As Hamid Karzai once suggested, this is the Afghan jihad, the true jihad, to be free to live in correctness with one another. That struggle lies in one's heart, the struggle to live a correct life, in the realm of one's beliefs.
Far braver the man who puts down his weapons to walk a path of peace than the man who clings to them in fear of living in coexistance.
In America we go through a revolution every four years or so around election time or at least an insurrection of sorts. We do this peacefully, and by loyal opposition if so inclined.
So it is with these thoughts put forward, as they may be a radical departure from any resolution put in blue, or any perspective offered before this fora in the past about the nature of the premis for this gathering's existance.
For we are an imperfectly dysfunctional family of nations gathered today seeking group therapy for the good of all humanity. Our collective well being depends on that being a lasting success. Implementing the words, "in larger freedom".
To "protect and serve" humanity and ensure the preservation of all cultures and ways of tradition that an individual or nation has the inalienable right to choose for themselves as they see fit; so long as it harms no other individual's or nation's ability to do so.
With this as our guiding philosophy as policy among nations, the undiscovered country called "world peace" may someday become reality.
Thus I propose a worthy goal to eliminate WMD of all types from the planet by the year 2045, marking 100 years since the first atomic weapon test. A reasonable target date if the will to achieve it exists. For if the will does not exist, neither will civilization. We being only human, and prone to err.
Instead let future historians of the 22nd century call these hundred years as the age of insanity, a brief psycotic break in the whole of human evolution.
Thank you for listening....We the people must ask the hard questions and provide perspective to those with the burden of responsibility for the future of mankind, having a vested interest in being siezed of the matter.
Mine is but one small voice in the global constituancy trying to help others find theirs among the family of nations.
I thank you for this opportunity.
Kirk in Kentucky writes:
Given the opportunity to address the UN I would focus on the need to re-examine the role of the aid culture and the methodology of the UN in performing the hundreds of assistance programs in place now and in the future.
The sovereignty of a nation is only rendered legitimate when it performs the essential functions and services for its citizens. The breakdown of these functions is the principal cause of global conflict and economic disruption. That much is well known, what is less understood is how the presence of the NGOs and UN contractors contribute to or prevent these breakdowns.
The UN must comprehensively re-structure and streamline the process of giving aid, but more importantly, it must increase the transparency and accountability of the pledging nations, programs, its directors, the companies, and NGOs, involved. We must assure that what is reported to the UN and the world is actually happening on the ground.
Here is a telling example: in 2005 USAID officials promised to spend millions of dollars to build 1,100 schools in Afghanistan in 2 years. 3 years later, only 8 schools have been built -- 6 of which have since collapsed. What happened and where did all that money go?
NGOs are a powerful force for delivering aid to countries, but by the same token, without consistent oversight, they also undermine the very institutions they purport to assist. The UN must no longer avoid the issue of corruption and parasitic interests if it truly wishes to build struggling nations into respectable and stable states.
To that end NGOs and government equivalents must be brought to heel and agree to some universal standards. For one, all plans and activities, in detail, must be made public to the citizens of recipient counties. Without public participation and approval, these efforts will not gain much support except by the involved companies making profit. Public awareness is the counter balance to private interests.
Second, while every NGO operates differently, there must be some standardization to the method of procurement and sub-contracting. There are many companies that take a share of aid for doing little more than pushing the work down the line, after taking their 20% management cut. The awesome impact of economic assistance, sometimes in the billions, is whittled away at each step until it is only a pittance by the time it reaches the people in need. The great strokes that could change this world for the better are being rendered ineffective by mis-management and opportunistic agents. This must stop and the heads of every organization must be held accountable, via legal repercussions, for not delivering on their contractual agreements. Any NGO, UN contractor, or government agency that fails to consistently improve the situation of recipient countries due to failures inside their realm of control, as reported by timely in-depth professional evaluations, must be black-listed and prosecuted. We must stamp out corruption and graft at all costs. More effort and resources must be put into oversight and investigation. The results of those findings must be made clear and proclaimed loudly. Increased spending in these areas will actually improve efficiency and cost effectiveness by reducing waste, fraud, and reduplication.
Finally, the UN must examine what the effects of aid rendered has on the recipient countries. Not just the results of said projects, but the impact of UN involvement and NGOs on the governments themselves. Are the people and governments involved in designing and implementing these plans, or are they being implemented unilaterally? Are civil servants being trained and supported, or are they being bleed from their governments? Are agencies working for the country or is the government dancing for aid agencies?
In short, the UN must break with the past and have an evolution of theory and practice that matches today's global paradigm. If we, the nations of the world, insist on aiding our brethren, we must do it right, a happy and safe future depends on it.
Eric in New Mexico writes:
@ Kirk,
I have no idea where you get your data from, but facts are facts, and you shouldn't come to the table without them having first been checked out by you personally at the source.
It might save you some intellectual embarassment in the future.
In 2002, when schools reopened, 97 percent of girls did not attend school. By the end of Taliban rule, 80 percent of schools were severely damaged or destroyed. To improve the situation, USAID constructed or refurbished over 680 schools and distributed more than 60 million textbooks. USAID created an accelerated learning program that enrolled over 170,000 students, more than half of whom were girls, and provided learning materials. Today, USAID supports more than 45,000 students in community-based education classes in areas where there is no access to formal schools and implements the Ministry of Education?s teacher training program in 11 provinces, supporting more than 50,000 teachers in the formal school system. As a result of the efforts by the Afghan government, the United States, and other donors, today more than 5.7 million students are in school, 35 percent of whom are girls.
However, I agree with the premis of your thinking on the matter in general. Regardless of the inaccuacy in the example you used, and ommission of the fact that the Taleban have directly targeted schools which have indeed caused a few to collapse.
There will always be room for improvement is my general point, as is your's if I do not miss my guess.
Anna in Washington, DC writes:
I read this week that over 500,000 women die each year in childbirth. In the last 20 years, the ratio of maternal deaths to babies born has barely changed in poorer countries. It reminded me that despite the advances that women have made, there is still much to be done, so I would speak about women's issues. Women's issues are everyone's issues. Mothers, daughters, sisters, wives...we as the world can -- and should -- do better by them.
Kirk in Kentucky writes:
@ Eric in New Mexico
The data I used was provided by Mr. Ashraf Ghani, Finance Minister of Afghanistan, from their book, co-authored by Clare Lockhart, "Fixing Failed States: A Framework For Rebuilding A Fractured World." If you wish to dispute his statement, I'm sure he would be pleased to hear from you.
A Washington Post article details further the successes and failures of these programs.
The New York Times:
Ann Jones cites similar figures in:
I'd also like to point out that referring to an agency's home page, like the USAID, while uplifting, is not a reliable source of information. They have a vested interest in suppressing reports of mistakes, polishing the mediocre, and promoting their successes, all of which there are plenty. Better sources are investigative agencies, like U.S. Government Accountability Office (U.S. GAO):
LP in Washington, DC writes:
I played Woodrow Wilson in Elementry School and established the League of Nations...how ironic...at Francis Scott Key School no less. A man without a country...even more ironic.
It seems the most prolific attainment the UN has is in the Narcotics trade and illegal banking.
Did everyone forget the 1980-1990s investigation which ended there? Makes you wonder why we even try -- but, the Narco dollar was stronger and in reality, what did some of these new democracies have to trade to acquire the means to feed and arm their people.
How about something simple like Joe said...that is what it was all about to begin with, peaceful survival and an end human sufferage.
Directly put: the last paragraph is the most important.
and Again, Wilsons last paragraph herein:
In case your too lazy:
Therefore, we cannot rewrite this treaty. We must take it or leave it, and gentlemen, after all the rest of the world has signed it, will find it very difficult to make any other kind of treaty. As I took the liberty of saying the other night, it is a case of "put up or shut up." The world cannot breathe in the atmosphere of negotiations. The world cannot deal with nations who say, "We won't play!" The world cannot have anything to do with an arrangement in which every nation says, "We will take care of ourselves."
Quote: We shall be one people or we will all perish.
Seems Chief Joseph knew it long ago...
John in California writes:
I love this blog. Keep up the good work.
Eric in New Mexico writes:
@ Kirk, FYI...links to NYT and WP articles good but way out of date (2005).
Ann Jones link produced site re-direct warnings from my box that site authenticity could not be verified. Better check it.
Given some of the known past corruption within the Afghan gov. including its finance ministry, and Karzai's struggle to clean up the minstries and hold higher standards of accountability it is also logical that some in Afghanistan will seek to blame those failures on the US.
I will accept USAID figures over that, and out of date media reports are just that, out of date, thus innacurate in 2008.
And if USAID put figures out on their website that wasn't cross checked with NGO's, interagency reports, and field reports from PRT's among others independant of any political office, I'd be very suprised.
Besides, State would have heard about it from a whole lot of folks including GAO long before now and corrected USAID on any inaccuracies.
As I said the premis of your statement was sound. For a reason, but not the reason by example you cited.
You say there was a lot done right and I agree, and it made me wonder at the lack of reporting on things done right by both NYT and WP over many years and in other context as well such as Iraq.
If I remember correctly, these same media outlets were filled with op-eds of "quagmire" in Afghanistan not two weeks in process of removing the Taleban, which was poor reporting at best, and politicly motivated at worst.
So if it's a matter of sourcing which often is the case, I know which sources to trust and the ones that may occasionally get the story right, but often don't.
Sarmoye in Mali writes:
1. UN must know that the development of Africa is not possible with the only opinion of political leaders. African peoples ignore how and when development policies are decided. Developed Countries which help Africa are verry blind if they think that a president who comes whith violence, killing and destroying can be think about anything without how to keep the power all his life.
2 . SOS. Terrorism and drug are veritable dangers in west africa. Our countries have not means to fight lonely against it. We are in the level of Afganistan in 1999.
Joe in Tennessee writes:
Bush did a good job yesterday in maintaining the importance of the threat of terrorism we all still face. It is devastating to any development all over the globe. It is a reality we must face and not look the other way because we are tired of it. It is to this day the single most effective method used to disengage development. You cannot get food to the people you try to help, you cannot educate, provide health care, create a secure foundation for anything with this situation continuing.
They are delighting various forms of dictatorships through fear and not even creating socialistic development for the people behind the rouse of false religious beliefs or social change which they never bring.
Even in South America, they have amassed enough monies via narcotics, they can have a say in the governments there in a productive manner, yet chose not to. They have the abililty to legitimize their funds and create jobs, yet do not. This fact applies to Afghanistan, the Philippines, etc. They do not because they evoke chaos, and chaos is EVIL. Do not think otherwise.
Shame Bush seems to be the only one who sees it for what it is...His Father did as well.
John in Greece writes:
"Ecology" is a great issue now days. "Think Green", "Think of the Planet" etc. However, how "Dip" this "Green" can be in a real life "scale of colours"?
According to my opinion, G.W. Bush kept a very close and prudent policy concerning the Eco issues. He took Eco issues very seriously. Nevertheless, all these 8 years, he faced very strong criticism, concerning his "environmental" choices, although I think that he never put in danger the sensitive fraction: Eco-conscience/real life of today.
I'll be honest with you. I had a little debate with a friend of mine, who is an "ecologist" (allow me the term). After this little discussion, I had even more objections concerning the exact point, where "today's socio-economic necessities" give an inch to Eco, and where "Eco" may claim a "dangerous" mile of these necessities.
In other words,
Where Eco begins, but also, how far can it go, without disturbing or destroy today's socio-economic life...
It's easy to be a fun of the so-called "eco-revolution", but isn't it a little bit utopian, when it becomes the only scope of someone's thinking about today's life?
Where are the boundaries of a logic approach to this issue?
Anna in Washington, DC writes:
@ Sarmoye in Mali --
Years ago I was shocked to learn about the violence in Sierra Leone and Liberia, but I thought things were getting better. I did not know how dire the situtation is in West Africa, that it could be compared to Afghanistan in 1999. That is terrifying.
Eric in New Mexico writes:
Ah, the economics of ecological stewardship...good subject John.
Don't know about Greece, but I would guess you have more sunny days than not in the Med.
About 300 sunny days out of the year here in New Mexico.
Imagine that the Greek government offered grants to home owners to install solar panels on your house w/ 12 volt deep cycle marine batteries and a voltage converter clean enough to power your computer and all your electrical needs of the home at your normal wall outlet current.
You are still connected to the electric grid if your three day battery storage capacity is insufficiant, and when you have more capacity to generate power than you can store, your house actually feeds power to the electric grid and the utility company pays you for it. Juice up your electric car, heat your hot water,...free, or at profit.
Imagine every home and buisiness in Greece converted to solar power. Greece would have more electricity than it knew what to do with.
It is not the future technology....We have it now.
Folks just have to get busy and get it happening on a mass scale to make a significant difference.
A lot has been said for nuclear power as a solution, but inherently waste management is a long term health and safety issue. Until that is resolved either through vitrification processes to make nuclear waste envioronmentally inert and then placed in underground storage facilities that need to be monitored and maintained for thousands of years till the waste's not immenently deadly to anything exposed to it if some future generation 10,000 years from now dug it up by mistake, you have a basic problem with nuclear power as a viable solution in general.
Not to mention that to fly a plane into a reactor would be a wish fulfillment dream to a terrorist.
It is a fact of life that nuclear power will be around for awhile. But it caries inherent environmental risks that are potentially devestating, and have been on occasion.
The US hasn't built a new commercial nuclear power plant in over 30 years for a reason.
Wind power is another option that's less geographicly sensitive than solar, and in less sunny climates a combination might prove more effective.
My basic point is that you don't just want to diversify energy sourcing by type of supply, you want to diversify cost effective energy production at the user end of the power grid to be non dependant upon a central power source that can be taken out of commission in natural disaster or by terrorist act.
Then you have true energy security.
Babar in Pakistan writes:
In the view of present situation here in Pakistan, no matter how much help and aid Pakistan gets from US, the negative views and attitude of the people towards US is not changing, the reason is not just one but unfortunately one of the main reason which I think your government also knows is that most of the aid and help from US doesn't reach to the people of Pakistan. Funds go in the pocket of corrupt government officials and so called non governmental organizations (NGOs). To gain the support of Pakistani people, to win their hearts and minds US government has to change its strategy, US government has to work from base, they have to have direct contact with people of Pakistan, How can they do it? I don't think it's much difficult; first of all they have to stop trusting local officials regardless they are in government or working for NGOs, because they cheat and do not use the funds for right purpose and then they make false reports and present false evidence of using the US funds to the Funding authorities.
US government must open schools in Pakistan but they must be administered directly by US officials. This is the key in success, key for the better future of the world. When children will get better opportunities to go to American Schools, they will prefer this instead of going to so called Madarasas and learning hatred. Poverty, lack of better education is helping those who are using young generation of Pakistan for their own purpose. Here in Pakistan I met few Americans who are based here to work and to help people directly, they are supervising the development work, small projects themselves. I want US government to encourage more people from US NGOs and people to come to Pakistan and work in the field of education and health and Unfortunately because of bad leadership and corrupt system we cant do it ourselves, US government and NGOs much supervise every work directly, I believe this can bring good results and can help US government to win the heart and mind of Pakistani people, this will be your great help towards achieving the peace in our region. I wish, I could do something towards world peace. I hope my words will reach to US officials with good faith and better understanding.
God Bless.
Molly in Washington, DC writes:
I agree with Joe in Greece, friends. If we don't address the environmental issues facing our planet, than all others will pale in comparison. No amount of wealth will be able to insulate us when we start running out of drinking water, fertile soil, clean air. We need to take action now.


text:
Monday, July 14, 2008
Weekend updates...
How was your weekend? For me, it passed way too quickly. I did a few makeup related things this weekend which was nice.
Friday night, I had a photoshoot for two girls and one guy. For one girl, I did a smokey brown eye and the other was a mix of golds, blues, and greens. As for the guy, a little concealer, powder, and mustache trim did the trick. It came out really well. The pictures should be up soon!
Saturday night I slept in and then played with my new mineralized duos! I used my fresh green mix duo and the pandemonium quad and created a really pretty green and purple eye. I'm wearing my gleeful blush from Sonic Chic and plum lipliner and sugarrimmed dazzleglass on my lips.
I'm trying to decide what look to do for a tutorial. Any suggestions? After that, I definitely rocked my look to the grocery store where my boyfriend and I finally stocked up on groceries. It's been a few too many weeks of scrounging around for food, lol. After that we went to the mall. My boyfriend wanted to check out this fish eye camera lens he saw at Urban Outfitters. He didn't end up getting it but I picked up a cute dress and a white long sleeved shirt to match for $32. Pretty good deal for Urban Outfitters since a lot of their stuff is a bit overpriced. After the mall, we headed to the movies to meet up with my Best Friend and her boyfriend and we saw Hell Boy 2.
I had seen the first one on TV a few weeks earlier so at least I knew what was going on. It was pretty entertaining and really funny actually. Imagine being the makeup artist for that set! You could probably wait for it to come to dvd or tv though.
Sunday I chilled during the day and then I had a meeting with "The Best Makeup Artists of Georgia" group in the evening. I found this group online, and it's a mix of MUAs, models, and photographers that are trying to form an organization where we can learn together and have a network of other artists to refer to for gigs. I invited fellow blogger Jaimie from Kiss and Makeup to join me. Before I arrived, I had to make sure my makeup was on point! I didn't want to do a bold eye because I always do that, so instead I rocked my new pro lipstick Lady Danger—it's a bright tomato red.
MAC Pro lipstick in Lady Danger
My eyes were pretty neutral with golds and browns and fake lashes of course. I wore my new dress from Urban Outfitters and bright red shoes and then I felt like a makeup artist, he he.
This was the first meeting so it was a little random…I got there on time but most of the others including the organizer didn't, lol. Mainly we networked with each other and learned a lot from a veteran makeup artist who was there. I also found out that there is a store called Atlanta Costume that sells a lot of Ben Nye and other theatrical makeup. Woo hoo! You know I'm going!
6 comments:
- Product Junkie Diva said...
Wow a makeup group sounds really cool. Your look in the pic is so pretty.
Great job again Renren.
As a tutorial suggestion would you be able to do a funky eyeshadow look where you have spots or lines in a wild design..not too wild though. Just a thought.lol
Product Junkie Diva
- July 14, 2008 at 2:15 PM
- yummy411 said...
hey ren beautiful look! i was about to see hell boy this weekend too as my son is enamoured by the trailers... but i chose not too. i've been doing a lot of movies on his behalf and i wasn't up for it this weekend. glad i didn't go see it!
- July 14, 2008 at 3:11 PM
- Wes said...
Your makeup is so cute & funky, I love it!
- July 15, 2008 at 12:34 AM
- mayaari said...
lovely purple and green eye - everyone seems to be snatching up that fresh green mix duo!
ahh hellboy 2...I've been told that I'm actually going to be treated to that movie, since hellboy was the movie that my BF and I saw on our first official meetup/date, haha.
- July 15, 2008 at 1:39 AM
- xoxo Jaimie said...
Yes girl, we HAVE to hit up that Atlanta Costume. It'll be a lot of fun! And how funny was it that we were the only two with bright bold lips. I love our bright makeup!
- July 15, 2008 at 8:59 AM
- MakeupByRenRen said...
productjunkiediva: yah the group was great! i was happy b/c there aren't as many bloggers in atlanta but i guess there's plenty of mUAs! hmmm sounds like a fun request, i'll try it!
yummy: just rent it girl, lol, save your money for batman!
wes: thx girl!
mayaari: aww that's so cute! there just might be a third one too, he he
jaimie: lol oh yes, we gotta rock the bright makeup. you free this saturday to go to atlanta costume?
- July 15, 2008 at 10:56 AM


text:
Cheeja sikhan lai ethey matha maro!
Normal Topic
Locked Topic
ik sawal ...... sanu apnya nu azmana chaida ya nai ???? by TRIKHA MUNDA
[Today at 03:17:24 PM]
Don't feel pain for those who left you by Decent Desi Munda
[Today at 03:04:53 PM]
kehdi sabji tuhanu sab to jaada pasand aa by Decent Desi Munda
[Today at 02:49:08 PM]
Russe nu kida manunda aa? by "AWARA PANCHI"
[Today at 01:27:13 PM]
pj da oh person jis naal tuc gal karna pasand karde ho??? by "AWARA PANCHI"
[Today at 01:16:30 PM]
tuhade to uppar wale person nu tusii kiven marnaa pasand karogey....? by "AWARA PANCHI"
[Today at 01:14:33 PM]
THE person above u , nu kehdi dish khlana pasand karoge????? lolzzzz by "AWARA PANCHI"
[Today at 01:13:13 PM]
tusi kehrhi cheez dekh k bohut khush hunde o?? by Decent Desi Munda
[Today at 12:43:32 PM]
Best DP of the Week by Gujjar no1
[January 20, 2017, 12:23:19 PM]
kive reha valentins by Qainaat
[January 20, 2017, 10:33:20 AM]
Girls Only: What Do You Use? by "AWARA PANCHI"
[January 20, 2017, 04:01:29 AM]
Big Boss 10 by MyselF GhainT
[January 19, 2017, 01:56:50 PM]
Photo naaal Emotions/mood express karo!!! by Gujjar no1
[January 18, 2017, 02:35:58 PM]
tere naam by Gujjar no1
[January 17, 2017, 05:20:49 PM]
which pj member do u miss ryt now? by Gabb-ee
[January 17, 2017, 04:28:41 AM]
Request Video Of The Day by 💖Stylo Kaur 💖
[January 16, 2017, 10:37:59 PM]
hindi /Urdu Four Lines Poetry by Gujjar no1
[January 16, 2017, 02:08:19 PM]
Just two line shayari ... by Gujjar no1
[January 16, 2017, 02:06:05 PM]
Weed Da Saroor By Bohemia, J Lucky by Joginder Singh
[January 16, 2017, 05:48:11 AM]
Share Your OOTD by "AWARA PANCHI"
[January 15, 2017, 12:47:06 PM]
Concealers/ Brighteners by Qainaat
[January 15, 2017, 12:07:04 PM]
Girls Only: Youtube Beauty Guru's by Qainaat
[January 15, 2017, 12:05:16 PM]
New Movie Trailers by Qainaat
[January 15, 2017, 11:57:10 AM]
She is Life by Qainaat
[January 15, 2017, 11:55:24 AM]
HAPPY NEW YEAR 2017 by Qainaat
[January 14, 2017, 06:02:55 PM]


text:
With that in mind, I approached "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," the new book by scholars John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, as I would a map of my neighborhood drawn up by an urban planning critic who has a known bias against gentrification. You know it will emphasize blight and ignore greenery to the point of unfairness, but you're interested anyway because you might learn something, confront a discomfiting truth or two and get an idea of how to make things better.
Imagine the surprise, then, with the map laid out on the table, when you see unrecognizable quadrants describing nonexistent dungeons and moonscapes. You might wonder: Is this guy on drugs?
Sitting across from Mearsheimer, a political science professor at the University of Chicago, and Walt, an international affairs professor at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, in the lobby of the Madison Hotel in Washington, it was obvious these guys were not on drugs. But why did they make up stuff?
Clearly this was not going to be a routine book tour interview, and I tried to make that known from the outset. I explained that I was not going to settle for the usual "How did you get your ideas?" sort of questions because their ideas seemed so strikingly wrong.
Others have called the Walt-Mearsheimer writings borderline anti-Semitic. I don't think so, but their fantastic claims -- particularly about Israel, the lobby's role in the lead-up to the Iraq War and the creation of the Bush administration hostility to Syria -- demand answers.
First let me emphasize that just as "The Israel Lobby" is severely flawed on many counts, the book has its strong points and weak points that merit less than a tidal wave of condemnation. For starters, the chapter outlining who and what constitutes the pro-Israel lobby and how these combined forces exercise their influence in Washington is a useful consolidation of reporting by others.
The chapters on what the authors describe as Israel's dwindling moral standing and decreasing strategic value to the United States invite plenty of disagreement on several fronts, but the authors do ask some hard and helpful questions about how the lobby functions and whether more discussion on Middle East policy matters would be useful.
The chapter on Israel's dealings with the Palestinians is certainly one-sided, omitting or downplaying crucial information that would provide the uninformed and unbiased readers with a balanced picture, but at least the arguments put forth by Mearsheimer and Walt are grounded in an existing Palestinian and pro-Palestinian narrative.
It is on the subject of the Iraq War -- specifically the effort to assign blame to Jerusalem and Jewish organizations -- that the authors go off the rails. On this question, I asked Mearsheimer and Walt particularly about their focus on Paul Wolfowitz, the former deputy defense secretary, who was an architect of the war.
Why, I wondered, no mention of Wolfowitz's many writings on the general idea of pre-emptive action, his efforts as the lead U.S. official shepherding democracy into the Philippines and Indonesia in the 1980s?
And what about his 2003 endorsement of the Geneva agreements positing Israel's return to pre-1967 lines, made explicitly because he believed the Israel-Palestinian issue had to be solved if Iraq was to succeed? (To say the lobby was less than enthusiastic about the Geneva agreements would be an understatement.) Were these not more germane to understanding his commitment to war with Iraq than rumors of his commitment to Israel?
Mearsheimer responded: "We're not making the argument that they were monomaniacal, that the United States had to invade Iraq for Israeli benefits."
Yet absent other evidence of the Bush administration's commitment to invade Iraq, that is exactly how their book comes across. The writers assemble quotes from leaders in Jerusalem to show that while Israel "did not initiate the campaign for war against Iraq," it "did join forces with the neoconservatives to help sell the war to the Bush administration and the American people."
The idea that Israel joined with neoconservatives to "sell" Bush on Iraq posits an inversion of how Washington operates -- especially under this administration. Bush's proxies made it clear to Jewish leaders -- and just about everyone else -- in the first days of the administration that the tradition of joining forces on areas of agreement and agreeing to disagree on all else was null: You either signed on with the whole Bush agenda or you were frozen out.
And so, as 2002 wore into 2003, every interest group in Washington that needed access to an immensely popular president -- the media, the Democrats and, yes, Jewish and pro-Israel groups -- signed on more or less to the White House policy that arched over all others: invading Iraq.
The authors weren't buying.
"Never mind" also characterizes the authors' response to my questions about the recent revelation by Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell's planning chief at the State Department and a fierce critic of the Pentagon neoconservatives who pushed for war, that Israeli leaders prior to the invasion made it clear that they thought Iran was the real threat and Iraq was a distraction.
"Once it became clear that the United States intended to do Iran and Syria after it handled Iraq, the Israelis quickly bought into the enterprise and pushed us very hard," Mearsheimer said.
But who was the "us" being pushed, if the Israelis were being pushed by the Bush administration?It is one thing for the authors to omit telling details that would undermine their theory. When it comes to America's Syrian policy, however, they omit whole trends.
Mearsheimer and Walt ignore Israel's panic -- reported by many news sources -- in late 2005, when it became clear that elements in the Bush administration were seeking regime change in Syria as "transformative." Israeli officials strove to make clear that they had outlined all post-regime scenarios and none of them were good.
Bush's fury with the Syrians for undermining the single Middle Eastern success of his pro-democracy policy, Lebanon's "Cedar Revolution" -- repeated in dozens of White House statements -- receives no mention in the Mearsheimer-Walt book. In fact, the only time the authors cite the successful ouster of Syrian occupation forces is when arguing that Israel's policies are inviting their return.
The authors forcefully rejected complaints that their book suffers from a lack of original research.
"The critical issue is whether or not we would tell a different story or someone else would tell a different story if they did more extensive interviewing than we did," Mearsheimer said. "And we're confident that would not be the case. We regard the story as basically correct, and doing more interviewing would not alter the story line in any way."
Yet such research would have led them to learn that it was not AIPAC but congressional Republicans who during last year's Lebanon War undercut the efforts by Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), then the minority leader in the U.S. House of Representatives, to include a line in a pro-Israel resolution urging "all sides to protect innocent civilian life." It would have led them to report that it was White House pressure, in part, that pushed Israel this April to distance itself for a week or so from Pelosi's efforts to assure Syria that Israel did not want war.
Questions about how Jews, Israel, the pro-Israel lobby and the U.S. government interact are critically important and beg for a little light. But "The Israel Lobby" is not the place to start. All Walt and Mearsheimer have achieved with their massive diversion based on unfounded accusations of overly broad Jewish influence is to help those who want to shut down that discussion.
Q & A with John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt
Ron Kampeas, Jewish Telegraphic Agency's Washington bureau chief, recently sat down with scholars Stephen Walt, international affairs professor at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, and John Mearsheimer, political science professor at the University of Chicago, to discuss their controversial new book, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy." What follows is an edited transcript of the interview.
Ron Kampeas: How does one write a book about the lobby without interviewing the lobbyists and the people lobbied?
Stephen Walt: First, we did talk to a number of people who had either been connected with some of these organizations and who had worked on Capitol Hill to make sure the story we were assembling was an accurate one. Second, this is a difficult subject because lots of people won't talk on the record if you do try to interview them and a number of the people we do quote based on other sources were quoted anonymously in those sources as well. Third, there are limits to what any two people can do, and we felt there was such an abundance of evidence already available that we could get a very accurate story of the way these organizations operate. Based on that record, I guess the last point I would make is that the real issue is not the precise research methods we used but rather whether or not the story we told is an accurate one.
John Mearsheimer: The critical issue is whether or not we would tell a different story or someone else would tell a different story if they did more extensive interviewing than we did -- and we're confident that would not be the case. We regard the story as basically correct, and doing more interviewing would not alter the story line in any way.
SW: One other point -- there is really no disagreement about whether or not there is an influential set of pro-Israel organizations in the United States of America. No serious person questions that. The only question is whether their influence is beneficial to the United States and Israel or whether it's become harmful to the United States and Israel.
JM: And doing more interviews is not going to answer that question.
RK: What do you say to those who argue that statements from Israeli leaders and Jewish organizations in support of the Iraq War should be understood from the vantage point of having to deal with a Bush administration that was insisting on support for its major initiatives?
SW: I guess I'm not persuaded by the argument that the Bush administration told them "you're with us or against us and that's the way we do business." Because these organizations were not at all bashful about taking on the Bush administration when they didn't like his calling for a Palestinian state, when he pushed Sharon around, when he tried to push Sharon around about the reoccupation of the West Bank [in April 2002]. It's not to me anyway particularly credible that, you know, Adam Goldman [Bush's first liaison to the Jewish community] told everybody to get on board and they obediently supported the Iraq War [to avoid] a falling-out with the Bush administration.
RK: Last month, Larry Wilkerson, the former policy planning chief at the U.S. State Department and a fierce critic of neoconservatives in the Pentagon who backed the Iraq War, said that Israeli leaders expressed concerns beforehand about the invasion.JM: What Wilkerson is saying is that the Israelis, when they caught wind of the fact that the United States was thinking about attacking Iraq, in early 2002 went to Washington and told the Americans, the Bush administration in particular, that the real threat was Iran, not Iraq, and they made it clear that they'd prefer we went after Iran and not Iraq. They had no problem with the United States effecting regime change in Iraq and Syria.
Iran was more important. Once it became clear that the United States intended to do Iran and Syria after it handled Iraq, the Israelis quickly bought onto the enterprise and pushed us very hard.
SW: Former prime ministers wrote op-eds. [Shimon] Peres told reporters that the invasion of Iraq is a must in the fall of 2002. If this is something they didn't want the United States to do, they had lots of ways to try to get the United States not to do it.
Maybe they wouldn't have succeeded, but the point is there's just no evidence that they were ever putting the brakes on. They wanted to make sure that we did not lose sight of the Iran problem while we were focusing on Saddam.
RK: What is the "unifying theme" that defines the Israel lobby?
SW: Although they differ on certain policy questions such as the desirability of a two-state solution, disagreements between the Zionist Organization of America on one side and say the Israeli Policy Forum on the other side or Americans for Peace Now, virtually all these organizations believe that the United States should support Israel by diplomatic, economic and military support almost independent of what Israel's actions are. So Americans for Peace Now does not advocate making U.S. aid conditioned on an end to settlements. They say that U.S. aid shouldn't be used for settlements, but they don't say we ought to link [it to Israel's actions]. They all want to maintain the special relationship; that's the unifying theme.
RK: Why did you simply assert in the book that the pro-Israel lobby is the most powerful foreign interest lobby instead of also examining the activities of influential organizations that deal with Cuba and Taiwan?
JM: First of all, we do acknowledge that there are other lobbies that identify with other countries. This is a book about one of those particular lobbies, and it's a completely legitimate enterprise to write a book on the Israel lobby or on the China lobby or on the Irish lobby. Why did we decide to write this book? Well, in the wake of Sept. 11 it became clear to the vast majority of Americans that American policy in the Middle East really mattered, and that it is very important that all of us think very long and hard about what our policy is and what the consequences are of that policy.
In doing research on the Middle East and thinking hard about what's going on in the Middle East, it became readily apparent to us that the lobby had significant influence on shaping that policy and yet no one was willing or hardly anyone was willing to talk about that publicly in the mainstream media. And we thought that it would be a good idea if someone wrote an article or wrote a book that focused on the Middle East and on the lobby's role in formulating the policy, American policy towards that region and asking the all-important question of whether or not that policy makes good sense for the United States of America. So that's what drove us to focus on the Israel lobby. It wasn't as if we had any animus to Israel.
SW: In [two separate assessments by Forbes and National Journal based on interviews with congressional staffers] the Cuban American National Foundation is not the one that comes in at No. 2. AIPAC comes in at No. 2, right behind I think AARP, or maybe it's tied with AARP right up there with the National Rifle Association. So if you go ask people on Capitol Hill who they think the most important lobbies -- you know, you were asking us "why didn't we go talk to people on Capitol Hill" -- guess what, Forbes and the National Journal went and talked to people on Capitol Hill, guess what answer they got? It wasn't the Armenian Americans who are, for their numbers, as Abraham Foxman now knows, a rather potent operation. But it's hard to argue that the United States has done as much for Armenia as it has done for Israel.
RK: Allegations of anti-Semitism, which you have faced from some critics, can be used to intimidate people from criticizing Israel. At the same time, accusing people of conducting a smear campaign simply because they attempt to analyze whether anti-Semitism is at work can also be seen as a way of silencing critics.
SW: I have yet to see much evidence that some people have been shy about playing the anti-Semitism card. We make it abundantly clear that not only do we condemn the most virulent forms of anti-Semitism, but we also condemn anything that is likely to limit the ability of Jews and anybody else in the United States to participate fully and actively in political and social life. The most mild and polite forms of stereotyping we also condemn; we think that Jewish Americans and all other Americans should be able to represent their views openly and use, express and manifest them. We condemn anything that gets in the way of that, and we certainly condemn anything that limits free speech and the expression of views. We made it very clear when we discussed anti-Semitism, we condemned all of its manifestations.
What we want to have is an open discussion of American interests and American policy in the Middle East and all the different factors that make that up. One of the nice things about writing the book is that we can keep the attention on substance, we can have that discussion, and we're going to learn from it, we're going to learn from our substantive critics, they're going to explain things that might be slightly different than what we thought they were. We're going to learn over time. We can't learn collectively as a society if we can't have an open discussion, and if we can't we're more likely to do stupid things that are bad for us and bad for Israel, too.RK: Professor Walt, do you regret that at an event in August 2006 organized by the Council on American-Islamic Relations, you said that Jews who previously served as U.S. diplomats, including Dennis Ross and Martin Indyk, "have attachments that shape how they think about the Middle East and how they think about American policy in that region?"
SW: I think many Americans of many different backgrounds have attachments for other societies that are based on their ethnic origins or their own personal experiences, like living overseas when they're in high school, and those affinities or attachments are going to shape how [they] think of different parts of the world. And I think that's wonderful; I have no problem with that whatsoever. We are a melting pot society, where lots of people have attachments; and, by the way, as you know, in the United States of America you can be a dual citizen, dual citizenship in both countries, and we don't assume that someone who's a dual citizen has no feelings whatsoever for the other country in which they are a citizen.
And it's perfectly OK for that person to then advocate policies that they think are good for the United States and good for the other society, too. This is just a fact of life in America and it's perfectly OK. But it's also OK for us to point out that individuals have multiple loyalties and to also argue that those multiple loyalties may fog up their view of what's in the American interest. It's complicated.
RK: In any way, have you purposely overstated your argument in an effort to land a political blow against pro-Israel organizations?
SW: We actually have no animus at all toward Israel or toward the organizations in the lobby. This is not some kind of crusade that we launched ourselves because we want to take down a set of organizations. We say in the conclusion, one of the things we hope will happen is that there's more open discussion of the issue, which would be good, and second we hope that some groups and organizations that we think are advocating polices that are in everybody's best interests become more influential -- not that we're trying to destroy these groups or organizations or even suggest that what they do is illegitimate. We just think that they have been advocating a set of policies that are not good for us and not good for Israel, and people can disagree with us, but it wasn't motivated by an anger or hostility. We're scholars; we're not part of any political movement, OK? We're just trying to write a book that's as accurate as possible.
View our privacy policy and terms of service.


text:
As far as the rumors about catcher A.J. Pierzynski, the Sun-Times reported three weeks ago that the Sox were talking to teams about him in an effort to gauge interest if they do get in a fire-sale mode. At the time, Williams didn't like what he was hearing.
A source said that hasn't changed and that Williams also has been trying to gauge what type of market there would be for closer Bobby Jenks and reliever Scott Linebrink. Again, he hasn't heard anything to pique his interest at the moment.
May 17, 2010
Kenny Williams trying to gauge the values of White Sox players
Leave a Comment »
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI


text:
This week Vermont's Best Shaker Style Furniture is on sale. Find traditionally inspired, real hardwood, 100% American made Shaker Furniture for every room in your home. Our entire Shaker line is skillfully handcrafted in Vermont and is available in natural cherry, maple, and walnut woods. Solidly built to last for generations of enjoyment and use. You'll receive 10% off one piece or save 15% when you buy 2 or more pieces (plus Free Delivery).
Browse and shop our online gallery for your new Shaker bedroom, dining room, living room, or home office furniture. Or feel free to contact us at 888-390-5571 to order by phone or discuss your questions about our Vermont made, solid wood Shaker furniture. Hurry! This Sale ends at midnight on Nov 15th.
This blog is written by your friends at Vermont Woods Studios. Check out our Vermont made furniture and home decor online and visit our showroom and art gallery at Stonehurst, the newly restored 1800s farmhouse nestled in the foothills of the Green Mountains.


text:
First Level Supervision 80 hour Online Course #4126
The Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission (WSCJTC), and the University of Wisconsin-Platteville (UWP) have forged a partnership to offer online educational opportunities to criminal justice professionals for career development.
The Online First Level Supervision 80 hour course focuses on the role and function of the first-line supervisor in criminal justice agencies. Participants will examine the importance of leadership styles; supervisory skills; functions and practices; communication skills; and motivation and team building in the development of line personnel. Once completed, the student will have completed their 40 hour core and 40 hour career level certification (CLC) electives. The following are the core components:
***Is this class full or not available???? Please complete the Course Interest Survey. Please Note: This is not a waiting list. You will not be contacted by WSCJTC unless there is enough interest to generate a class being scheduled. At that time we will contact everyone that has shown interest so that applications can be submitted.


text:
Adam Curtis commented on "Jellyella tuberculata (Bosc 1802)":
Bryozoan Genus: Membranipora Species: tuberculata ITIS: 155828 Primary Common Name: Kelp encrusting bryozoan Common names (s): Lacy crust bryozoan, Kelp lace bryozoan, Encrusting bryozoan, sea mat Similar Species: Membranipora villosa, Membranipora membranacea General grouping: (pull down on site) Zooplankton Geographic Range Range description: Kelp encrusting bryozoans are prevalent in warm, temperate, and tropical waters of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans, wherever floating Sargassum or Fucus is found. Brief range description: (this should always be included in above description) Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans Habitats (pull down on site) Habitat notes: Commonly found encrusted on floating brown algae, especially the kelps Macrocystis and Cystaseira, and also on smaller plants in shore, especially the red algae Gelidium, occasionally on shells or wood, low inter-tidal zone to shallow subtidal depths. M. tuberculata is found on gulfweed and rockweed in the Atlantic, and on kelps and other seaweeds in the Pacific. Abundance Relative abundance: M. tuberculata species are among the best-known marine bryozoans, and are commonly found in oceans around the world. Heavy encrusting of kelp fronds with the bryozoan Membranipora is common in kelp forests. Species Description: The kelp encrusting bryozoan, Membranipora tuberculata, is a colony form-ing a white crust, up to several centimeters in diameter. It consists of a single layer of zooids, which have a fine reticulate honeycomb appearance. Individual colonies are 0.5-0.8 mm tall, over 76 mm wide, rectangular, and covered with a lightly calcified mem-brane, with a heavily calcified rim, bearing calcified tubercles at the distal corners, as well as tiny spines projecting from the side of the rim, to the center of an individual. Distinctive features: The membraniporids are the only members of the order Cheilostomata known to have a planktotrophic cyphonautes larva, a free swimming, plankton feeding stage with a triangular bivalve shell. This settles and meta-morphoses into an ancestrula (often double or twinned), which buds to form a flat, en-crusting colony. Key Feature M. tuberculata is known for encrusting the kelp Macrocystis; under favorable conditions colonies grow rapidly and may coalesce to cover entire kelp blades in 3-4 weeks. Overgrown blades often bear 0.5-1 kg of bryozoans per square meter of blade surface, and occasionally perhaps ten times that density. Size: Colony Height: 0.5-0.8 mm Width: more than 76 mm (3 in.) Natural History General natural history: Bryozoans are an ancient group, with a fossil record extending from the early Pleistocene. In the phylum Bryozoa there are about 4,000 species, which makes it one of the major phyla. Over 250 species have been recorded just in California. Forms of the colony vary among different species, which range from flat encrusted sheets, to folded leaf-like bushes. Bryozoans use microscopic mobile pincers called "avicularia" to pluck off any settlers that try to land on them. If pieces of a bryozoan colony break off, the pieces can continue to grow and form new colonies. Colonies increase in size asexually by budding. New colonies are created by hermaphroditic sexual reproduction. The twin shelled larvae of Membranipora, known as cyphonautes, feed in the plankton for several weeks, usually in surface waters, before they settle and metamor-phose. The larvae appear regularly in plankton tows; while drifting freely they fall prey to many pelagic invertebrate predators as well as fishes. Next the cyphonautes settle on a blade of giant kelp and metamorphose into twinned zooid ancestrulas of Membranipora. From this twinned ancestrula, this young colony grows by budding. Within about three weeks, such colonies may spread from this tiny beginning to sheets that completely encase sections of kelp blades and floats; they can add a row of zooids every 18 hours. Infrequently, colonies with spines at the corners of some zooid houses may occur natural-ly; more often the spines are absent. However, in most colonies lacking spines, the spines will develop as a predator induced defense, a response to predation such as from nudi-brancs. Before this induced defense was recognized, spined colonies were thought to be a wholly different species. In laboratory experiments, the predatory defense is triggered in less than one hour, in water that bears chemical cues from predators, which ceases if the predators are removed. The spines greatly impede predation by these predators. Bryozoans are tiny invertebrates, which expand from one, to a colony of thousands, which can encrust an entire kelp blade. Individual bryozoans, called zooids, live within box-shaped compartments made of calcium carbonate, and chitin, material that is found in crab shells. Zooids are extremely small, perhaps smaller than 1/32 of an inch. These tiny larval bryozoans are clam-like swimmers, in bivalve shells. Bryozoans parachute down onto clean kelp blades by opening their shells like umbrellas and drifting down. Always alert for chemical cues, bryozoans test the surface, and then cement themselves to the kelp blades with a sort of sticky glue. Younger bryozoans settle in place and change into adult form, captive within their own shelled rectangular house. After becoming established on the kelp, the lone settlers begin to multiply. Budding off clones in neat rows, a colonies fan out, frosting the blade with a crust of the tiny animals. Predator(s): Bryozoan colonies are important food sources for some nudibrancs, sea urchins and fish Prey: Bacteria, phytoplankton, small organic detritus, and other small organisms. Feeding behavior: (click on site) Feeding behavior notes Bryozoans have a unique feeding appendage, called a lophophore. A lophophore, is a U-shaped, circular ring of tentacles that are ciliated, and used for filter feeding. By extend-ing a crown of tentacles above its shell, bryozoans flick their tentacles through the water to catch small bits of food. Reproduction Feeding and spawning may take place simultaneously. The lophophoral tentacles surround the mouth, which leads to a U-shaped gut. The anus opens just outside the lophophore. There is a lot going on here, but most of it is only revealed under a dissecting microscope. At intervals, small groups of adjacent zooids suddenly retract their lophophores in unison and then suddenly retract them, suggesting a neural connection between zooids. Zooids that are full with ripe eggs, take on an orange color, due to carotenoid pigments from ingested diatoms. Spawned zygotes (fertilized eggs), emerge from the intertenticular organ (the ITO, a short tube lying between two tentacles at the lophophores rim). They bounce from one lophophore to another as they are caught and then rejected in the feed-ing currents of different zooids until they finally reach open water at the edge of the colo-ny. Bryozoan zooids are hermaphroditic. Sperm are released by testes into a zooids body cav-ity, or coelom, and emitted in packets, tail first, through the pore in one of two specia-lized tentacles. As they emerge from the tentacles, many of the sperm packets are swept into exhalent currents and carried away from the colony for possible cross-fertilization in other colonies. Other sperm packets may be drawn into lophophores of sister zooids in the same colony. In either case, the sperm wiggle vigorously amid the lophophores tentacles; a few may be eaten, but many somehow enter the ITO head first and pass into the recipient's coelom. It isn't known if a chemo-attractant is involved. Almost 100 percent of the eggs are fertilized as they enter the coelom through the oviduct. The resultant zy-gotes then enter the inner end of the ITO, pass out into the lophophores discharge current, and soon are in the open sea. Embryonic development does not commence until four days after the zygotes are released. Seasonal Behavior Spring and summer Seasonal kelp habitat In spring and summer, habitat for bryozoans is replenished by kelp growth, but later it is reduced and even wholly removed by the loss of canopy from autumn die-back and win-ter storms. This cycle places many constraints on the community. Since kelp blades only live for an average of three months, the sessile animals that colonize them must conform to an exacting timetable of rapid growth, early sex, and a short lifespan. Conservation Issues Bryozoans are studied in great detail, by biochemical scientists. The relatively transparent living colonies are excellent for observations under a microscope. Some bryozoans could have potential medical uses, as they produce a large variety of chemical compounds.
The Newsfeed for this EOL Taxon Page gathers updates associated with items shown on it, including curator actions and comments from EOL users.
Add a new comment
EOL content is automatically assembled from many different content providers. As a result, from time to time you may find pages on EOL that are confusing.
To request an improvement, please leave a comment on the page. Thank you!