100 Agree Quotes

Do not confuse "duty" with what other people expect of you; they are utterly different. Duty is a debt you owe to yourself to fulfill obligations you have assumed voluntarily. Paying that debt can entail anything from years of patient work to instant willingness to die. Difficult it may be, but the reward is self-respect. But there is no reward at all for doing what other people expect of you, and to do so is not merely difficult, but impossible. It is easier to deal with a footpad than it is with the leech who wants "just a few minutes of your time, please—this won't take long." Time is your total capital, and the minutes of your life are painfully few. If you allow yourself to fall into the vice of agreeing to such requests, they quickly snowball to the point where these parasites will use up 100 percent of your time—and squawk for more! So learn to say No—and to be rude about it when necessary. Otherwise you will not have time to carry out your duty, or to do your own work, and certainly no time for love and happiness. The termites will nibble away your life and leave none of it for you. (This rule does not mean that you must not do a favor for a friend, or even a stranger. But let the choice be yours. Don't do it because it is "expected" of you.)

And so they parted, she to the east, and he to the west. The test they had agreed upon, however, was utterly unnecessary. They should never have undertaken it, because they really and truly were each other's 100% perfect lovers, and it was a miracle that they had ever met. But it was impossible for them to know this, young as they were. The cold, indifferent waves of fate proceeded to toss them unmercifully.

I will no longer let the fear of vicious comments or replies stop me from speaking what I believe to be right. I will also never give a message that everybody will agree with. I know that even my most faithful followers will never agree 100% with what I say. I also know that they know that and are fine with it. I am done letting the bullies win. They won’t anymore. Not here.

He found himself one night in a bar standing beside a gorgeous woman. “Would you be willing to sleep with me for $1 million?” he asked her. She looked him over. There wasn’t much to see—but still, $1 million! She agreed to go back to his room. “All right then, “ he said. “Would you be willing to sleep with me for $100?” “A hundred dollars!” she shot back. “What do you think I am, a prostitute?” “We’ve already established that. Now we’re just negotiating the price.

Once upon a time, there lived a boy and a girl. The boy was eighteen and the girl sixteen. He was not unusually handsome, and she was not especially beautiful. They were just an ordinary lonely boy and an ordinary lonely girl, like all the others. But they believed with their whole hearts that somewhere in the world there lived the 100% perfect boy and the 100% perfect girl for them. Yes, they believed in a miracle. And that miracle actually happened. One day the two came upon each other on the corner of a street. “This is amazing,” he said. “I’ve been looking for you all my life. You may not believe this, but you’re the 100% perfect girl for me.” “And you,” she said to him, “are the 100% perfect boy for me, exactly as I’d pictured you in every detail. It’s like a dream.” They sat on a park bench, held hands, and told each other their stories hour after hour. They were not lonely anymore. They had found and been found by their 100% perfect other. What a wonderful thing it is to find and be found by your 100% perfect other. It’s a miracle, a cosmic miracle. As they sat and talked, however, a tiny, tiny sliver of doubt took root in their hearts: Was it really all right for one’s dreams to come true so easily? And so, when there came a momentary lull in their conversation, the boy said to the girl, “Let’s test ourselves - just once. If we really are each other’s 100% perfect lovers, then sometime, somewhere, we will meet again without fail. And when that happens, and we know that we are the 100% perfect ones, we’ll marry then and there. What do you think?” “Yes,” she said, “that is exactly what we should do.” And so they parted, she to the east, and he to the west. The test they had agreed upon, however, was utterly unnecessary. They should never have undertaken it, because they really and truly were each other’s 100% perfect lovers, and it was a miracle that they had ever met. But it was impossible for them to know this, young as they were. The cold, indifferent waves of fate proceeded to toss them unmercifully. One winter, both the boy and the girl came down with the season’s terrible inluenza, and after drifting for weeks between life and death they lost all memory of their earlier years. When they awoke, their heads were as empty as the young D. H. Lawrence’s piggy bank. They were two bright, determined young people, however, and through their unremitting efforts they were able to acquire once again the knowledge and feeling that qualified them to return as full-fledged members of society. Heaven be praised, they became truly upstanding citizens who knew how to transfer from one subway line to another, who were fully capable of sending a special-delivery letter at the post office. Indeed, they even experienced love again, sometimes as much as 75% or even 85% love. Time passed with shocking swiftness, and soon the boy was thirty-two, the girl thirty. One beautiful April morning, in search of a cup of coffee to start the day, the boy was walking from west to east, while the girl, intending to send a special-delivery letter, was walking from east to west, but along the same narrow street in the Harajuku neighborhood of Tokyo. They passed each other in the very center of the street. The faintest gleam of their lost memories glimmered for the briefest moment in their hearts. Each felt a rumbling in their chest. And they knew: She is the 100% perfect girl for me. He is the 100% perfect boy for me. But the glow of their memories was far too weak, and their thoughts no longer had the clarity of fouteen years earlier. Without a word, they passed each other, disappearing into the crowd. Forever. A sad story, don’t you think?

Those three things - autonomy, complexity, and a connection between effort and reward - are, most people agree, the three qualities that work has to have if it is to be satisfying. It is not how much money we make that ultimately makes us happy between nine and five. It's whether our work fulfills us. If I offered you a choice between being an architect for $75,000 a year and working in a tollbooth every day for the rest of your life for $100,000 a year, which would you take? I'm guessing the former, because there is complexity, autonomy, and a relationship between effort and reward in doing creative work, and that's worth more to most us us than money.

I believe one should never invalidate another, even if you don't agree. No one is ever 100% right or 100% wrong. There is always some measure of truth on both sides." - L. R. W. Lee

You’re not supposed to agree with everything I say. It’s okay to disagree. It doesn’t make you right and me wrong, and it certainly doesn’t make me right and you wrong. It’s just opinion. So it’s not whether you agree with my opinions or not that matter. What matters is that you respect them. And conversely that I respect your opinions. You can disagree with me, you can argue with me, and you can be different from me, but don’t ever try and shut me up.

He could never understand the sense of a constest in which the two adversaries have agreed upon the rules

My policy is if they haven’t found a job in twelve months then they take the first one that’s offered them. And no choice in the matter. They’ve had twelve months to find the job they want, and they’ve done fuck all about it, so it’s time to grab them by the scruff of the neck and send them out to work. Agreed?  

Look at the crowd. They all agree on some simple answer to a complex problem. You know in your gut that they are wrong, even if the situation does not break down into a 100% good party versus a 100% bad party. Their assertions, cloaked in positivity, reek of denial and death to the instinct in your gut and heart.

Somebody who agrees with me 80% of the time is a friend and ally, not a 20% traitor.” ~ Ronald Reagan

Differences are not a failure of humanity, differences are a test of our humanity.

Change is possible only if the top management agrees.

...Teller doesn’t buy it: “Taking good, smart risks is something that anyone can do, whether you’re on a team of 5 or in a company of 50,000.”18 Bezos would agree. “Given a ten percent chance of a 100 times payoff, you should take that bet every time,” he wrote...

And then there’s the tale of an economist on holiday in Las Vegas. He found himself one night in a bar standing beside a gorgeous woman. “Would you be willing to sleep with me for $1 million?” he asked her. She looked him over. There wasn’t much to see—but still, $1 million! She agreed to go back to his room. “All right then, ” he said. “Would you be willing to sleep with me for $100?” “A hundred dollars!” she shot back. “What do you think I am, a prostitute?” “We’ve already established that. Now we’re just negotiating the price.

After McMaster left, Trump asked, “Who was that guy? He wrote a book didn’t he? It said bad things about people. I thought you told me he was in the Army.” “He is in the Army.” “He’s dressed like a beer salesman,” the president said. Bannon, noted for his terrible wardrobe, agreed. He thought McMaster’s suit looked like it cost only $ 200, or maybe only $ 100.

There are many who predict that China is the next challenger to the United States, not Russia. I don’t agree with that view for three reasons. First, when you look at a map of China closely, you see that it is really a very isolated country physically. With Siberia in the north, the Himalayas and jungles to the south, and most of China’s population in the eastern part of the country, the Chinese aren’t going to easily expand. Second, China has not been a major naval power for centuries, and building a navy requires a long time not only to build ships but to create well-trained and experienced sailors. Third, there is a deeper reason for not worrying about China. China is inherently unstable. Whenever it opens its borders to the outside world, the coastal region becomes prosperous, but the vast majority of Chinese in the interior remain impoverished.

The controversy over resurrection, then, proved critical in shaping the Christian movement into an institutional religion. All Christians agreed in principle that only Christ himself—or God—can be the ultimate source of spiritual authority. But the immediate question, of course, was the practical one: Who, in the present, administers that authority? Valentinus and his followers answered: Whoever comes into direct, personal contact with the “living One.” They argued that only one’s own experience offers the ultimate criterion of truth, taking precedence over all secondhand testimony and all tradition—even gnostic tradition! They celebrated every form of creative invention as evidence that a person has become spiritually alive. On this theory, the structure of authority can never be fixed into an institutional framework: it must remain spontaneous, charismatic, and open.

It is easier to deal with a footpad than it is with the leech who wants “just a few minutes of your time, please—this won’t take long.” Time is your total capital, and the minutes of your life are painfully few. If you allow yourself to fall into the vice of agreeing to such requests, they quickly snowball to the point where these parasites will use up 100 percent of your time—and squawk for more! So learn to say No—and to be rude about it when necessary.

What interested these gnostics far more than past events attributed to the “historical Jesus” was the possibility of encountering the risen Christ in the present.49 The Gospel of Mary illustrates the contrast between orthodox and gnostic viewpoints. The account recalls what Mark relates: Now when he rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene … She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept. But when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they would not believe it.50 As the Gospel of Mary opens, the disciples are mourning Jesus’ death and terrified for their own lives. Then Mary Magdalene stands up to encourage them, recalling Christ’s continual presence with them: “Do not weep, and do not grieve, and do not doubt; for his grace will be with you completely, and will protect you.”51 Peter invites Mary to “tell us the words of the Savior which you remember.”52 But to Peter’s surprise, Mary does not tell anecdotes from the past; instead, she explains that she has just seen the Lord in a vision received through the mind, and she goes on to tell what he revealed to her. When Mary finishes, she fell silent, since it was to this point that the Savior had spoken with her. But Andrew answered and said to the brethren, “Say what you will about what she has said. I, at least, do not believe that the Savior has said this. For certainly these teachings are strange ideas!”53 Peter agrees with Andrew, ridiculing the idea that Mary actually saw the Lord in her vision. Then, the story continues, Mary wept and said to Peter, “My brother Peter, what do you think? Do you think that I thought this up myself in my heart? Do you think I am lying about the Savior?” Levi answered and said to Peter, “Peter, you have always been hot-tempered … If the Savior made her worthy, who are you to reject her?”54 Finally Mary, vindicated, joins the other apostles as they go out to preach. Peter, apparently representing the orthodox position, looks to past events, suspicious of those who “see the Lord” in visions: Mary, representing the gnostic, claims to experience his continuing presence.55 These gnostics recognized that their theory, like the orthodox one, bore political implications. It suggests that whoever “sees the Lord” through inner vision can claim that his or her own authority equals, or surpasses, that of the Twelve—and of their successors. Consider the political implications of the Gospel of Mary: Peter and Andrew, here representing the leaders of the orthodox group, accuse Mary—the gnostic—of pretending to have seen the Lord in order to justify the strange ideas, fictions, and lies she invents and attributes to divine inspiration. Mary lacks the proper credentials for leadership, from the orthodox viewpoint: she is not one of the “twelve.” But as Mary stands up to Peter, so the gnostics who take her as their prototype challenge the authority of those priests and bishops who claim to be Peter’s successors.

Those three things—autonomy, complexity, and a connection between effort and reward—are, most people agree, the three qualities that work has to have if it is to be satisfying. It is not how much money we make that ultimately makes us happy between nine and five. It’s whether our work fulfills us. If I offered you a choice between being an architect for $75,000 a year and working in a tollbooth every day for the rest of your life for $100,000 a year, which would you take? I’m guessing the former, because there is complexity, autonomy, and a relationship between effort and reward in doing creative work, and that’s worth more to most of us than money.

Those three things—autonomy, complexity, and a connection between effort and reward—are, most people agree, the three qualities that work has to have if it is to be satisfying. It is not how much money we make that ultimately makes us happy between nine and five. It’s whether our work fulfills us. If I offered you a choice between being an architect for $75,000 a year and working in a tollbooth every day for the rest of your life for $100,000 a year, which would you take? I’m guessing the former, because there is complexity, autonomy, and a relationship between effort and reward in doing creative work, and that’s worth more to most of us than money. Work that fulfills those three criteria is meaningful.

Snowbound up here with you. Without books or business to occupy my time, I wonder what I’ll do,” he added with a leer. She blushed gorgeously, but her voice was serious as she studied his face. “If things hadn’t gone so well for you-if you hadn’t accumulated so much wealth-you could have been happy up here, couldn’t you?” “With you?” “Of course.” His smile was as somber as hers. “Absolutely.” “Although,” he added, linking her hands behind her back and drawing her a little closer, “you may not want to remain up here when you learn your emeralds are back in their cases at Montmayne.” Her head snapped up, and her eyes shone with love and relief. “I’m so glad. When I realized Robert’s story had been fabrication, it hurt beyond belief to realize I’d sold them.” “It’s going to hurt more,” he teased outrageously, “when you realize your bank draft to cover their cost was a little bit short. It cost me $45,000 to buy back the pieces that had already been sold, and $5,000 to buy the rest back from the jeweler you sold them to.” “That-that unconscionable thief!” she burst out. “He only gave me $5,000 for all of them!” She shook her head in despair at Ian’s lack of bargaining prowess. “He took dreadful advantage of you.” “I wasn’t concerned, however,” Ian continued teasing, enjoying himself hugely, “because I knew I’d get it all back out of your allowance. With interest, of course. According to my figures,” he said, pausing to calculate in his mind what it would have taken Elizabeth several minutes to figure out on paper, “as of today, you now owe me roughly $151,126.” “One hundred and- what?” she cried, half laughing and half irate. “There’s the little matter of the cost of Havenhurst. I added that in to the figure.” Tears of joy clouded her magnificent eyes. “You bought it back from that horrid Mr. Demarcus?” “Yes. And he is ‘horrid.’ He and your uncle ought to be partners. They both possess the instincts of camel traders. I paid $100,000 for it.” Her mouth fell open, and admiration lit her face. “$100,000! Oh, Ian-“ “I love it when you say my name.” She smiled at that, but her mind was still on the splendid bargain he’d gotten. “I could not have done a bit better!” she generously admitted. “That’s exactly what he paid for it, and he told me after the papers were signed that he was certain he could get $150,000 if he waited a year or so.” “He probably could have.” “But not from you!” she announced proudly. “Not from me,” he agreed, grinning. “Did he try?” “He tried for $200,000 as soon as he realized how important it was to me to buy it back for you.” “You must have been very clever and skillful to make him agree to accept so much less.” Trying desperately not to laugh, Ian put his forehead against hers and nodded. “Very skillful,” he agreed in a suffocated voice. “Still, I wonder why he was so agreeable?” Swallowing a surge of laughter, Ian said, “I imagine it was because I showed him that I had something he needed more than he needed an exorbitant profit.” “Really?” she said, fascinated and impressed. “What did you have?” “His throat.

Another clue to the evolutionary existence of casual mating comes from variations in sperm production and insemination (Baker & Bellis, 1995). In a study to determine the effect on sperm production of separating mates from each other, 35 couples agreed to provide ejaculates resulting from sexual intercourse from condoms. The partners in each couple had been separated for varying intervals of time. Men’s sperm count went up dramatically with the increasing amount of time the couple had been apart since their last sexual encounter. The more time spent apart, the more sperm the husbands inseminated in their wives when they finally did have sex. When the couples spent 100 percent of their time together, men inseminated 389 million sperm per ejaculate, on average. But when the couples spent only 5 percent of their time together, men inseminated 712 million sperm per ejaculate, almost double the amount. The number of sperm inseminated, according to the authors of the study, increases when other men’s sperm might be inside the wife’s reproductive tract at the same time due to the opportunity provided for extramarital sex. The increase in sperm insemination upon being reunited did not depend on the time since the man’s last ejaculation. Even when the man had masturbated to orgasm while away from his wife, he still inseminated more sperm on being reunited if he had been away from her a long time. The increase in sperm inseminated by the husband after prolonged separation ensures that his sperm will stand a greater chance in the race to the egg by crowding out or displacing a possible interloper’s sperm.

Having resisted repeated requests to evacuate Pripyat and the surrounding area by Legasov since his arrival, Scherbina relinquished on the evening of the 26th, and agreed that the population within 10km of the plant should be moved to a safe distance. However, even this decision was tainted. While the scientists favoured immediate compulsory evacuation, Scherbina decided not to inform the city’s residents until late the following morning, leaving them unaware of the perils faced by venturing outside for another night and almost no time to prepare for the evacuation. 1,100 buses in a convoy drove overnight from Kiev to transport the evacuees out of the area. Officials forbade residents from leaving in their personal cars out of concern that they would cause traffic jams and prevent a steady departure.

failed to mention that the land upon which Angola is built had once been the plantation of Isaac Franklin, a man whose business, Franklin and Armfield, became one of the largest slave-trading firms in the United States. The plantation produced 3,100 bales of cotton a year, a yield higher than most other plantations in the South. He failed to mention that Samuel Lawrence James, who purchased the plantation from Franklin’s widow, was a former major in the Confederate Army. James agreed to a twenty-one-year lease with the state to purchase access to all of the state’s prisoners as long as he was able to keep all of the profits. James subsequently subcontracted the prisoners to labor camps, where—as Roger had told us—they worked on levees and railroads in horrific conditions. A prisoner under James’s lease had a greater chance of dying than an enslaved person did.

Xerox’s venture capital division wanted to be part of the second round of Apple financing during the summer of 1979. Jobs made an offer: “I will let you invest a million dollars in Apple if you will open the kimono at PARC.” Xerox accepted. It agreed to show Apple its new technology and in return got to buy 100,000 shares at about $10 each. By the time Apple went public a year later, Xerox’s $1 million worth of shares were worth $17.6 million. But Apple got the better end of the bargain. Jobs and his colleagues went to see Xerox PARC’s technology in December 1979 and, when Jobs realized he hadn’t been shown enough, got an even fuller demonstration a few days later. Larry Tesler was one of the Xerox scientists called upon to do the briefings, and he was thrilled to show off the work that his bosses back east had never seemed to appreciate. But the other briefer, Adele Goldberg, was appalled that her company seemed willing to give away its crown jewels. “It was incredibly stupid, completely nuts, and I fought to prevent giving Jobs much of anything,” she recalled.

LEADING LESSONS Use your fears; don’t let them direct or define you. Fear sends your brain a message that it’s time to make a decision--like when I decided I would ride that coaster. You can also decide to do nothing; you can stand watching the world zip by from the sidelines. I choose to see my fears as a green light. They mean go, not stop, and you’re always in the driver’s seat. Don’t give fear any more power than it already has. As I said, I was often afraid of failure. But instead of letting the fear keep me from reaching my goals, I let it propel me. In the movie After Earth, Will Smith’s character states that fear is simply made up by our own imaginations. “Danger is real, but fear is a choice.” Who knew Will was such a gifted philosopher? I agree 100 percent. Why is one person afraid of something and another other person isn’t? We’re all humans, but we’ve all had different experiences and therefore we have different associations. It’s personal. The possibility of freedom exists wherever fear lies. When you realize that it’s you who is creating this fear, the fear loses its ability to control you.

The only path McAuliffe saw to hard-money parity ran through cycles of prospecting new donors, in the mail and online. To accomplish that on the scale he believed crucial, Democrats needed the list of 100 million new names, sortable by party registration or voting behavior, that would fill a national voter file. McAuliffe proposed a deal to the state chairs, that the DNC would effectively borrow their files, help clean them up, add new data like donor information and commercially available phone numbers, and then return them for the state party’s use. At the same time, McAuliffe went to Vinod Gupta, a major Democratic fund-raiser and Clinton friend who was the founder and CEO of InfoUSA, one of the country’s large commercial data vendors. Like many of his rivals, Gupta had been trying for years to find customers in the political world, and offered McAuliffe a good deal for his product. McAuliffe agreed, and as the state files came in, the DNC would send them out to InfoUSA’s Omaha servers, where hundreds of pieces of new information were added to each voter’s profile. A new interface was built to navigate it all. It was called Demzilla.

Story time. In September of 1869, there was a terrible fire at the Avondale coal mine near Plymouth, Pennsylvania. Over 100 coal miners lost their lives. Horrific conditions and safety standards were blamed for the disaster. It wasn’t the first accident. Hundreds of miners died in these mines every year. And those that didn’t, lived in squalor. Children as young as eight worked day in and out. They broke their bodies and gave their lives for nothing but scraps. That day of the fire, as thousands of workers and family members gathered outside the mine to watch the bodies of their friends and loved ones brought to the surface, a man named John Siney stood atop one of the carts and shouted to the crowd: Men, if you must die with your boots on, die for your families, your homes, your country, but do not longer consent to die, like rats in a trap, for those who have no more interest in you than in the pick you dig with. That day, thousands of coal miners came together to unionize. That organization, the Workingmen’s Benevolent Association, managed to fight, for a few years at least, to raise safety standards for the mines by calling strikes and attempting to force safety legislation. ... Until 1875, when the union was obliterated by the mine owners. Why was the union broken so easily? Because they were out in the open. They were playing by the rules. How can you win a deliberately unfair game when the rules are written by your opponent? The answer is you can’t. You will never win. Not as long as you follow their arbitrary guidelines. This is a new lesson to me. She’s been teaching me so many things, about who I am. About what I am. What I really am. About what must be done. Anyway, during this same time, it is alleged a separate, more militant group of individuals had formed in secret. The Molly Maguires. Named after a widow in Ireland who fought against predatory landlords, the coal workers of Pennsylvania became something a little more proactive, supposedly assassinating over two dozen coal mine supervisors and managers. ... Until Pinkerton agents, hired by the same mine owners, infiltrated the group and discovered their identities. Several of the alleged Mollies ended up publicly hanged. Others disappeared. You get the picture. So, that’s another type of secret society. The yeah-we’re-terrorists-but-we-strongly-feel-we’re-justified-and-fuck-you-if-you-don’t-agree society. So, what’s the moral of this little history lesson? This sort of thing happens all day, every day across the universe. It happens in Big Ways, and it happens in little ways, too. The strong stomp on the weak. The weak fight back, usually within the boundaries of the rat trap they find themselves confined. They almost always remain firmly stomped. But sometimes, the weak gather in secret. They make plans. They work outside the system to effect change. Like the Mollies, they usually end up just as stomped as everyone else. But that’s just life. At least they fucking tried. They died with their boots on, as much as I hate that expression. They died with their boots on for their people, their family, not for some rich, nameless organization that gives no shits whether they live or die. Or go extinct. Or are trapped for a millennia after they’re done being used. In my opinion, that’s the only type of society that’s worth joining, worth fighting for. Sure, you’re probably gonna die. But if you find yourself in such a position where such an organization is necessary, what do you have to lose? How can you look at yourself if you don’t do everything you can? And that brings us to the door you’re standing in front of right now. What does all this have to do with what you’re going to find on the other side? Nothing!

LEADING LESSONS Criticism can be useful. I’ve taken a beating from the DWTS judges on many occasions. Most of the time, because I’m always aware of the cameras in my face, I just suck it up and take it. Here’s the thing: I realize that maybe they’re seeing something I’m not. Sometimes you’re too close to a situation, too connected to it, to be 100 percent honest with yourself. Or your ego gets in the way and won’t let you improve, because that would mean changing course and admitting you were wrong. I tell my partners to listen carefully when Len, Carrie Ann, or Bruno has a constructive criticism for us. Yes, sometimes it boils down to taste and opinion (and I don’t always agree), but often it’s a valid point. They want us to succeed. The way I see it, you have lots of choices on how to handle it: the first is to lose your temper, get defensive, and spend the rest of the night beating yourself up about it. The second--a natural reaction for most people--is to mentally shut down when someone points out your flaws. Who wants to hear that? Let me just drown it out and ignore it. The third option is your best: keep your mind and your ears open. You can learn about your weaknesses and how you can improve them. A leader is never scared of criticism, but instead knows there is always room to grow and improve. So bring it on.

English Gingerbread Cake Serves: 12 to 16 Baking Time: 50 to 60 minutes Kyle Cathie, editor for the British version of The Cake Bible (and now a publisher), informed me in no uncertain terms that a book could not be called a cake "bible" in England if it did not contain the beloved gingerbread cake. When I went to England to retest all the cakes using British flour and ingredients, I developed this gingerbread recipe. Now that I have tasted it, I quite agree with Kyle. It is a moist spicy cake with an intriguing blend of buttery, lemony, wheaty, and treacly flavors. Cut into squares and decorated with pumpkin faces, it makes a delightful "treat" for Halloween. Batter Volume Ounce Gram unsalted butter (65° to 75°F/19° to 23°C) 8 tablespoons (1 stick) 4 113 golden syrup or light corn syrup 1¼ cups (10 fluid ounces) 15 425 dark brown sugar, preferably Muscovado ¼ cup, firmly packed 2 60 orange marmalade 1 heaping tablespoon 1.5 40 2 large eggs, at room temperature ¼ cup plus 2 tablespoons (3 fluid ounces) 3.5 100 milk 2/3 cup (5.3 fluid ounces) 5.6 160 cake flour (or bleached all-purpose flour) 1 cup plus 2 tablespoons (or 1 cup), sifted into the cup and leveled off 4 115 whole wheat flour 1 cup minus 1 tablespoon (lightly spooned into the cup) 4 115 baking powder 1½ teaspoons . . cinnamon 1 teaspoon . . ground ginger 1 teaspoon . . baking soda ½ teaspoon . . salt pinch . . Special Equipment One 8 by 2-inch square cake pan or 9 by 2-inch round pan (see Note), wrapped with a cake strip, bottom coated with shortening, topped with a parchment square (or round), then coated with baking spray with flour Preheat the Oven Twenty minutes or more before baking, set an oven rack in the lower third of the oven and preheat the oven to 325°F/160°C. Mix the Liquid Ingredients In a small heavy saucepan, stir together the butter, golden syrup, sugar, and marmalade over medium-low heat until melted and uniform in color. Set aside uncovered until just barely warm, about 10 minutes. Whisk in the eggs and milk. Make the Batter In a large bowl, whisk together the cake flour, whole wheat flour, baking powder, cinnamon, ginger, baking soda, and salt. Add the butter mixture, stirring with a large silicone spatula or spoon just until smooth and the consistency of thick soup. Using the silicone spatula, scrape the batter into the prepared pan. Bake the Cake Bake for 50 to 60 minutes, or until a wire cake tester inserted in the center comes out clean and the cake springs back when pressed lightly in the center. The cake should start to shrink from the sides of the pan only after removal from the oven. Cool the Cake Let the cake cool in the pan on a wire rack for 10 minutes. While the cake is cooling, make the syrup.

It will be agreed that you can’t divide a cake up into its component crumbs and say ‘This crumb corresponds to the first word in the recipe, this crumb corresponds to the second word in the recipe’, etc. In this sense it will be agreed that the whole recipe maps onto the whole cake. But now suppose we change one word in the recipe; for instance, suppose ‘baking-powder’ is deleted or is changed to ‘yeast’. We bake 100 cakes according to the new version of the recipe, and 100 cakes according to the old version of the recipe. There is a key difference between the two sets of 100 cakes, and this difference is due to a one-word difference in the recipes. Although there is no one-to-one mapping from word to crumb of cake, there is one-to-one mapping from word difference to whole-cake difference. ‘Baking-powder’ does not correspond to any particular part of the cake: its influence affects the rising, and hence the final shape, of the whole cake. If ‘baking-powder’ is deleted, or replaced by ‘flour’, the cake will not rise. If it is replaced by ‘yeast’, the “cake will rise but it will taste more like bread. There will be a reliable, identifiable difference between cakes baked according to the original versoin and the ‘mutated’ versions of the recipe, even though there is no particular ‘bit’ of any cake that corresponds to the words in question. This is a good analogy for what happens when a gene mutates.

It will be agreed that you can’t divide a cake up into its component crumbs and say ‘This crumb corresponds to the first word in the recipe, this crumb corresponds to the second word in the recipe’, etc. In this sense it will be agreed that the whole recipe maps onto the whole cake. But now suppose we change one word in the recipe; for instance, suppose ‘baking-powder’ is deleted or is changed to ‘yeast’. We bake 100 cakes according to the new version of the recipe, and 100 cakes according to the old version of the recipe. There is a key difference between the two sets of 100 cakes, and this difference is due to a one-word difference in the recipes. Although there is no one-to-one mapping from word to crumb of cake, there is one-to-one mapping from word difference to whole-cake difference. ‘Baking-powder’ does not correspond to any particular part of the cake: its influence affects the rising, and hence the final shape, of the whole cake. If ‘baking-powder’ is deleted, or replaced by ‘flour’, the cake will not rise. If it is replaced by ‘yeast’, the “cake will rise but it will taste more like bread. There will be a reliable, identifiable difference between cakes baked according to the original version and the ‘mutated’ versions of the recipe, even though there is no particular ‘bit’ of any cake that corresponds to the words in question. This is a good analogy for what happens when a gene mutates.

One way Dan demonstrates to his students the concept of sunk cost is through a game in which participants bid to purchase a $100 bill. Rule #1: Bidding starts at $5. Rule #2: Bids can only increase by $5 at a time. Rule #3: The winner pays the amount of his or her final bid and gets the $100. The last rule is that the second-highest bidder also pays what he or she has bid, but gets nothing. As the game progresses, the bids rise to $50 and $55, at which point Dan will have made money. (The $55 bidder will pay $55 to get $100 and the second bidder will pay $50 and get nothing.) At some point, someone bids $85 and a competitor bids $90. At that point, Dan stops them and reminds them that the first person will win $10 ($100 minus $90) and the second person will lose $85. He asks the $85 bidder whether they want to continue to $95. Inevitably, they say yes. Then he asks the first person the same question, and he happily agrees to go to $100. But it doesn’t stop there at $100. Next, Dan asks the person who’s bid $95 if they want to go to $105. As before, if they say no, they’ll lose their previous bid: $95. But at this point, when the bidding is over $100, if they say yes, that means they are now actively bidding knowing that they will lose money. This time it’s $5 ($105 bid minus $100 winnings), but the loss will only increase from there. Inevitably, both participants keep bidding higher and higher until at some point one person realizes how crazy this is and they stop (and the person stopping ends up losing $95 more).

In the EPJ results, there were two statistically distinguishable groups of experts. The first failed to do better than random guessing, and in their longer-range forecasts even managed to lose to the chimp. The second group beat the chimp, though not by a wide margin, and they still had plenty of reason to be humble. Indeed, they only barely beat simple algorithms like “always predict no change” or “predict the recent rate of change.” Still, however modest their foresight was, they had some. So why did one group do better than the other? It wasn’t whether they had PhDs or access to classified information. Nor was it what they thought—whether they were liberals or conservatives, optimists or pessimists. The critical factor was how they thought. One group tended to organize their thinking around Big Ideas, although they didn’t agree on which Big Ideas were true or false. Some were environmental doomsters (“We’re running out of everything”); others were cornucopian boomsters (“We can find cost-effective substitutes for everything”). Some were socialists (who favored state control of the commanding heights of the economy); others were free-market fundamentalists (who wanted to minimize regulation). As ideologically diverse as they were, they were united by the fact that their thinking was so ideological. They sought to squeeze complex problems into the preferred cause-effect templates and treated what did not fit as irrelevant distractions. Allergic to wishy-washy answers, they kept pushing their analyses to the limit (and then some), using terms like “furthermore” and “moreover” while piling up reasons why they were right and others wrong. As a result, they were unusually confident and likelier to declare things “impossible” or “certain.” Committed to their conclusions, they were reluctant to change their minds even when their predictions clearly failed. They would tell us, “Just wait.” The other group consisted of more pragmatic experts who drew on many analytical tools, with the choice of tool hinging on the particular problem they faced. These experts gathered as much information from as many sources as they could. When thinking, they often shifted mental gears, sprinkling their speech with transition markers such as “however,” “but,” “although,” and “on the other hand.” They talked about possibilities and probabilities, not certainties. And while no one likes to say “I was wrong,” these experts more readily admitted it and changed their minds. Decades ago, the philosopher Isaiah Berlin wrote a much-acclaimed but rarely read essay that compared the styles of thinking of great authors through the ages. To organize his observations, he drew on a scrap of 2,500-year-old Greek poetry attributed to the warrior-poet Archilochus: “The fox knows many things but the hedgehog knows one big thing.” No one will ever know whether Archilochus was on the side of the fox or the hedgehog but Berlin favored foxes. I felt no need to take sides. I just liked the metaphor because it captured something deep in my data. I dubbed the Big Idea experts “hedgehogs” and the more eclectic experts “foxes.” Foxes beat hedgehogs. And the foxes didn’t just win by acting like chickens, playing it safe with 60% and 70% forecasts where hedgehogs boldly went with 90% and 100%. Foxes beat hedgehogs on both calibration and resolution. Foxes had real foresight. Hedgehogs didn’t.

Another plan, to march on Alexander’s court nearly four hundred miles away in St Petersburg itself, was proposed, but Berthier and Bessières quickly convinced Napoleon on logistical grounds ‘that he had neither time, provisions, roads, nor a single requisite for so extensive an expedition’.32 Instead they discussed marching south nearly 100 miles to Kaluga and Tula, the granary and arsenal of Russia respectively, or retreating to Smolensk. Napoleon eventually chose what turned out to be the worst possible option: to return to the Kremlin, which had survived the fire, on September 18 to wait to see whether Alexander would agree to end the war. ‘I ought not to have stayed in Moscow more than two weeks at the utmost,’ Napoleon said later, ‘but I was deceived from day to day.’33 This was untrue. Alexander didn’t deceive Napoleon into thinking he was interested in peace; he simply refused to reply either positively or negatively. Nor was Napoleon self-deceived; the burning of Moscow confirmed him in his belief that there was no hope of peace, even though he would probably have accepted as little as Russia’s return to the Continental System as the price.34 The reason he stayed in Moscow for so long was that he thought he had plenty of time before he needed to get his army back to winter quarters in Smolensk, and he preferred to live off the enemy’s resources. On September 18, Napoleon distributed 50,000 plundered rubles to Muscovites who had lost their houses and he visited an orphanage, dispelling the widespread rumour that he was going to eat its inhabitants.35 ‘Moscow was a very beautiful city,’ he wrote to Maret, using the past tense. ‘It will take Russia two hundred years to recover from the loss which she has sustained.

In his job as a financial educator, Keith had spent a fair amount of time breaking down the act — and sometimes art — of short selling, in a way that less savvy customers could understand. When a trader believed a company was in trouble, and its stock was overvalued, they could 'borrow' shares, sell them, and then when the stock went down as they'd predicted, rebuy the shares at a lower price, return them to whoever they'd borrowed them from, and pocket the difference. If GameStop was trading at 5, you could borrow 100 shares, sell them for $500; when the stock hit 1, you bought back the 100 shares for $100, returned them, pocketing $400 for yourself. You paid a little fee to the lender for their trouble and came out with a tidy profit. But what happened if the stock went up instead of down? What happened if GameStop figured out how to capitalize on its millions of nostalgic customers, who spent billions on video games every year? What if the stock went to 10 instead of 1? What happened was, the short seller was royally screwed. He'd borrowed those 100 shares and sold them at 5. Now the stock was at 10, but he still needed to return his 100 shares. Buying them on the market at 10 meant spending $1000. And what was worse, when he'd borrowed the shares, he'd agreed on a timeline to return them. There was a ticking clock hanging over his head, so he had a choice — buy the shares back at 10 now, losing $500 on the deal — or wait a little longer, hoping the stock went back down before his time limit was up. And what if he waited, and the stock kept going up? Sooner or later, he had to buy those shares back. Even if the stock went to 15, 20 — he was on the hook for those 100 shares. Theoretically, there was no limit to how much he could lose.

CUENCA 2016 Do You Believe in Magic? So, I'm thinking, maybe this Universe thing really works. I've only used up two of my wishes so maybe I should try for a really big one on the third --   You may have noticed that I have been somewhat "antsy" and slightly disturbed by the lack of men taller than 5 ft 5 here -- well, really, the lack of men in general. I freely admit, I miss the male relationships I usually have (or used to have before I was ill). So, in the spirit of my usual blatant honesty, here is my Wish List, Dear Universe. I will pay you back somehow, I promise. And I'll be good. I promise. And this will be my last wish forever, I promise. Okay? Here goes. My Perfect Man would be a man. I am 100% sure of that. Not a woman. He should be tall. At least 6 feet. Well, maybe 5 ft. 8. Okay. 5 ft. 7 but that's my final offer. He should have read Kafka. Well, at least he should know who Kafka is. Okay. He should be able to read. He should be able to discuss art and agree that its beauty lies in the subjectivity of its appreciation. A picture of dogs playing poker on a velvet background, hanging in his living room, is a deal breaker. He should have thick black/gray hair. Well, he should have hair. Okay. Thinning hair is okay. Well, no hair is good, too, as I now know what thinning hair feels like.  So, you got me.  Hair is negotiable. He should have a sense of humor. Reading this list should make him laugh.

We all agree that the main concept of ​​a metasearch engine is to compare and find the best rates, right? Well, we may be wrong. Up until only 10 years ago, there were dozens of OTAs, each one specialized in a niche market. But, over the years, these OTAs have been acquired, integrated or simply merged under Booking and Expedia's brands. Today, digital distribution is, de facto, a duopoly. And with only two OTAs sharing almost 100% of online transactions, what exactly a metasearch engine should do?

In between the 1976 and the 1986 editions of FM 100-5, officers in US Army debated the relevance of Auftragstaktik in a modern army. A survey of the articles written in the Army’s two professional journals, Military Review and Parameters, indicated that officers agreed that the Army’s system of leadership, command, and control did not maximize the talents of junior officers.

My husband is everything I’m not when it comes to social skills. He’s naturally compassionate, outgoing, empathetic, and confident. He can walk into a room full of strangers and strike up a conversation with anyone. People gravitate toward him. When it comes to our daughter’s social skills, I give him 100 percent of the credit. He modeled behaviors for her that don’t come naturally to me and that I’ve never learned to fake well. As parents, we haven’t always seen eye to eye. There were times when he thought I was being too cold-hearted and there were times when I thought he was being too sentimental. We’ve had to compromise on some issues and agree to disagree on others. We’ve both made mistakes. But we’ve also come to realize that we have our own strengths. When Jess needs sympathy or relationship advice, she usually talks to her dad. When she needs help filling out forms for a new job or fixing her computer, she calls me. She intuitively worked out what we can each give her as parents long before any of us knew what Asperger’s was.

What is the Paris Climate Agreement? 195 countries signed a pledge to keep global temperature rise below 2°C (3.6°F), and, if possible, below 1.5°C (2.7°F). All countries agree to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions to net zero as soon as possible in the second half of the century. The U.S. pledged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. India aims to install 175 gigawatts of renewable energy capacity by 2022. China will peak its CO2 emissions by 2030. Developed countries will provide $100 billion in climate finance by 2020. Countries should raise the ambition of their initial commitments over time to make sure we meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement entered into force on November 4, 2016.

Chasing tax cheats using normal procedures was not an option. It would take decades just to identify anything like the majority of them and centuries to prosecute them successfully; the more we caught, the more clogged up the judicial system would become. We needed a different approach. Once Danis was on board a couple of days later, together we thought of one: we would extract historical and real-time data from the banks on all transfers taking place within Greece as well as in and out of the country and commission software to compare the money flows associated with each tax file number with the tax returns of that same file number. The algorithm would be designed to flag up any instance where declared income seemed to be substantially lower than actual income. Having identified the most likely offenders in this way, we would make them an offer they could not refuse. The plan was to convene a press conference at which I would make it clear that anyone caught by the new system would be subject to 45 per cent tax, large penalties on 100 per cent of their undeclared income and criminal prosecution. But as our government sought to establish a new relationship of trust between state and citizenry, there would be an opportunity to make amends anonymously and at minimum cost. I would announce that for the next fortnight a new portal would be open on the ministry’s website on which anyone could register any previously undeclared income for the period 2000–14. Only 15 per cent of this sum would be required in tax arrears, payable via web banking or debit card. In return for payment, the taxpayer would receive an electronic receipt guaranteeing immunity from prosecution for previous non-disclosure.17 Alongside this I resolved to propose a simple deal to the finance minister of Switzerland, where so many of Greece’s tax cheats kept their untaxed money.18 In a rare example of the raw power of the European Union being used as a force for good, Switzerland had recently been forced to disclose all banking information pertaining to EU citizens by 2017. Naturally, the Swiss feared that large EU-domiciled depositors who did not want their bank balances to be reported to their country’s tax authorities might shift their money before the revelation deadline to some other jurisdiction, such as the Cayman Islands, Singapore or Panama. My proposals were thus very much in the Swiss finance minister’s interests: a 15 per cent tax rate was a relatively small price to pay for legalizing a stash and allowing it to remain in safe, conveniently located Switzerland. I would pass a law through Greece’s parliament that would allow for the taxation of money in Swiss bank accounts at this exceptionally low rate, and in return the Swiss finance minister would require all his country’s banks to send their Greek customers a friendly letter informing them that, unless they produced the electronic receipt and immunity certificate provided by my ministry’s web page, their bank account would be closed within weeks. To my great surprise and delight, my Swiss counterpart agreed to the proposal.19

Thiel’s doomsday predictions also prompted an unusual request. In preparation for a summer 2000 board meeting, Thiel had asked Musk if he could present a proposal. Musk agreed. “Uh, Peter’s got an agenda item he’d like to talk about,” Musk said, handing the reins to Thiel. Thiel began. The markets, he said, weren’t done driving into the red. He prophesied just how dire things would get—for both the company and for the world. Many had seen the bust as a mere short-term correction, but Thiel was convinced the optimists were wrong. In his view, the bubble was bigger than anyone had thought and hadn’t even begun to really burst yet. From X.com’s perspective, the implications of Thiel’s prediction were dire. Its high burn rate meant that it would need to continue fundraising. But if—no, when—the bubble truly burst, the markets would tighten further, and funding would dry up—even for X.com. The company balance sheet could drop to zero with no options left to raise money. Thiel presented a solution: the company should take the $100 million closed in March and transfer it to his hedge fund, Thiel Capital. He would then use that money to short the public markets. “It was beautiful logic,” board member Tim Hurd of MDP remembered. “One of the elements of PayPal was that they were untethered from how people did stuff in the real world.” The board was uniformly aghast. Members Moritz, Malloy, and Hurd all pushed back. “Peter, I totally get it,” Hurd replied. “But we raised money from investors on a business plan. And they have that in their files. And it said, ‘use of proceeds would be for general corporate purposes.’ And to grow the business and so forth. It wasn’t to go speculate on indices. History may prove that you’re right, and it will have been brilliant, but if you’re wrong, we’ll all be sued.” Mike Moritz’s reaction proved particularly memorable. With his theatricality on full display, Moritz “just lost his mind,” a board member remembered, berating Thiel: “Peter, this is really simple: If this board approves that idea, I’m resigning!

The elders, being met at Boston about this matter, sent some of their company to acquaint the old governor with their desire, and the reasons moving them, clearing themselves of all dislike of his government, and seriously professing their sincere affections and respect towards him, which he kindly and thankfully accepted, concurring with them in their motion, and expressing his unfeigned desire of more freedom, that he might a little intend his private occasions, wherein (they well knew) how much he had lately suffered (for his bailiff, whom he trusted with managing his farm, had engaged him £2500 without his privity) in his outward estate. This they had heard of, and were much affected therewith, and all the country in general, and took course, (the elders agreeing upon it at that meeting,) that supply should be sent in from the several towns, by a voluntary contribution, for freeing of those engagements; and the court (having no money to bestow, and being yet much indebted) gave his wife three thousand acres of land, and some of the towns sent in liberally, and some others promised, but could perform but little, and the most nothing at all. The whole came not to £500 whereof near half came from Boston, and one gentleman of Newbury, Mr. Richard Dummer, propounded for a supply by a more private way, and for example, himself disbursed £100.

Most of the 100% Savage Women are so sensitive&so emotional 100% Savage Queens too! Men needs to show empathy&sympathy to be emotionally being there for 100% Savage so emotional Women too even though they go through their struggles and their hard times in their life! 100% Agreed&Preach!

Women also believe that morality, or what is good and bad, is not up for debate. There is exactly one set of moral laws which humans have agreed upon over time on a pathway to perfection. People aren’t good or evil based on what they do, but what they believe. This is why you’re constantly being berated, not for being wrong, but for your tone. Sure, people can believe in different moralities, but in her mind all of those moralities ultimately place you on a scale from 1 to 100. They have moral objectivity.

Don't Have to Agree, to Love (Sonnet 1347) You don't have to agree with a person completely, to love them - accept them. There are a few, I disagree with plenty, yet till death, I'll fight for them. Not all that Rumi wrote apply today, yet I love Mevlana like my own brother. Even more of Aquinas are out of date, yet like a friend I love my Thomas. Heart doesn't care about consensus of the brain, Heart only cares for an inexplicable closeness. Intellect has no bearing over heart's closeness, Often intellect is a barrier to life's wholeness. Intellect is boon, but only when it helps wholeness. Being right is not necessarily the mark of goodness.

You don't have to agree with a person completely, to love them.

I don't see an enormous difference between a society in which you sell yourself to someone and a society in which you rent yourself to someone. I mean, they seem to me approximately equally inhuman. Well, we agree now, though we didn't 100 years ago, on the first - that slavery is wrong. But there's another thing, which in the old days used to be called wage slavery, which means that you rent yourself to somebody else in order to survive. It means that control over resources, and production, and investment is in the hands of a particular, and rather small group of people, and everyone else has the choice of either dying or renting themselves to them, more or less on their terms. And that seems to me a totally intolerable form of human life, you know. I mean, there's no reason to accept that any more than there was a reason to accept slavery, or feudalism, or whatever. How do you change that? Well, you try to change it through existing institutions. You probably fail. In which case you change the institutions, which are not graven in stone, you know. History hasn't come to an end.

I try a bite for myself and agree it’s tasty.

Mark was certainly written after 70 (the year the Jerusalem temple was destroyed), but how long after is an open question We really have no evidence that Mark was written any earlier than 100, in fact, so it's simply presumption really that puts his Gospel in the first century. [...] Nothing is known of the author. Late tradition claims he was Peter's secretary, but there is no reason to trust that information, and it seems most unlikely. Mark is advocating against Torah-observant Christianity (see Chapter 10, §5) and thus would have been Peter's opponent, not representative. There is no evidence really that Matthew was written in the 80s. Nothing is known of the author. We know 'Matthew' was not an eyewitness, because he copies Mark verbatim and just modifies and adds to him [...], which is not the behavior of a witness, but of a late literary redactor. [...] John wrote after Luke-as almost everyone agrees [...] It could have been written as late as the 140s (some argue even later) or as early as the 100s (provided Luke was written in the 90s). [...] John was redacted multiple times and thus had multiple authors. 32 Nothing is known of them.

Accepted. With one word, I had agreed to hunt down a man, kill him, and send back proof of his death in order to obtain a $100,000 payoff. I was no longer in the military, but I’d been trained well and now made a good living for myself with my particular skill set. Most jobs came to me directly, but on occasion, I sought out work.

Students can use this framework to set a goal and refer back to it when evaluating their achievements. Here’s an example from an intermediate student: Specific – He has the goal of telling stories with more accurate use of tenses. Measureable – He records himself telling an anecdote today and again in a week’s time after he has practised. Agreed – He seeks the agreement of the teacher to confirm that it is a priority he needs to work on to be more easily understood. Realistic – He’s not expecting miracles! 100% precision in all the narrative tenses after a week, for example, is probably not realistic. Time bound – He reckons on a week to give him enough time to improve. He’s earmarked three slots through the week to practise.

Matthew, Mark, and Luke were all written in Greek. But Jesus probably did not speak Greek. He was a Jewish peasant. He might have known a little Greek, but his normal tongue would have been the Semitic dialect commonly spoken by the peasants of Palestine in the first century CE, Aramaic. The original oral tradition associated with Jesus would have been communicated among the peasants of Galilee also in Aramaic. Now, here is the problem. When we compare the same stories in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, they agree not just in general or in gist, but often word for word, verbatim. Not 100 percent verbatim, but often as much as 80 percent, and sometimes even more. How shall we explain this? Does a theory of oral transmission work? Say a set of stories circulated orally in Aramaic; they were told and retold in great variety. They usually communicated the gist but were never word for word the same. Then, gradually, bilingual listeners began to repeat the stories, now sometimes in Aramaic, sometimes in Greek. Greek versions began to circulate orally, told and retold in great variety, usually communicating the gist but never being told word for word the same. Imagine the various ways in which any particular story might have been told, in two different languages, by dozens of different people, in myriad different contexts. Now imagine a story from this oral tradition beginning with Jesus, spreading around in Aramaic, then trickling over into Greek, and spreading around again in the new language; finally one particular version falls on the ears of, say, the author of Matthew, who includes it in his gospel. Now imagine that a different author, say, the author of Luke, hears the same story, but a version of it that has taken a different route through that complex process of being passed on, and he also decides to include it in his gospel. What are the chances that these two versions of the story will agree with one another, in Greek, nearly verbatim? A clever mathematician could perhaps compute the odds. Let us just say, they would be astronomical. But that’s not all. Jesus was an aphorist and a storyteller. How many times would he have told one of his parables, a good one like the Sower? Dozens of times? Probably. But when a gospel writer includes a parable in his narrative, he can only really use it once. If he were to repeat it as Jesus actually had done, over and over again, that would be tedious. He has to choose one place to put it and one way to tell it. Now, when the authors of Matthew and Mark include the Parable of the Sower in their gospels, they both just happen to portray Jesus telling it right after a scene in which Jesus is accused of having a demon, Beelzebul, so that his family must come to try and take him away. And that story, in both gospels, follows close after a story in which Jesus is healing and exorcizing multitudes. And that story, in both gospels, follows one in which Jesus heals a man with a withered hand. And before that, in both gospels, there is a story about Jesus and his disciples passing through the grain fields of Galilee, feeding themselves from the gleanings. It is not just that Matthew, Mark, and Luke share a large number of stories, sayings, and parables, or that these common traditions often agree almost verbatim from gospel to gospel. They also present these things in the same order. Could oral tradition account for all of that? Never.

IN CLOSING, LET’S TAKE a brief look back at where we began: with 10 children who developed type 1 diabetes in 24 months within two miles of one another in the upscale suburbs of Boston. Rather than bemoan their fate, parents there organized and asked for an investigation to be conducted by the state, which is ongoing. Among those who have participated in organizing meetings are Ray Allen, the Celtics star, and his wife, Shannon, whose son, Walker, was the seventh child diagnosed there. “Shannon and Ray have turned out to be the most incredible advocates,” Ann Marie Kreft recently told me. “We have fabulous people on board who are spending inordinate amounts of their time on advocacy.” I asked her what they are advocating for. “I think we all agree that mandatory case reporting would be the ideal,” she said. “That would be the dream come true. I think we may be building up to that.” Rather than have to design a special survey every time an apparent cluster of type 1 cases emerges, mandatory case reporting, on a national level, would permit the CDC to automatically track cases as they emerge, to see not only the big national picture, but also local variations that could prove crucial in unraveling the riddle of why type 1 diabetes continues to rise, each and every year, by 3 percent. Presently, however, no national organization is advocating for mandated case reporting of type 1. Where is the line of protesters holding placards, marching outside the Atlanta offices of the CDC? Perhaps we need to look farther back, to the period before the diabetes pandemic began. In 1866, you might recall, the death rate from diabetes in New York City was 1.3 per 100,000 residents. If that rate held today for the 306 million residents of the United States, there would be 4,284 deaths due to diabetes each year. Instead, in 2006, there were 72,507 death certificates on which diabetes was listed as the underlying cause. The official national death rate from diabetes now stands at 23.3 per 100,000, according to the CDC — nearly 19 times higher than it was following the Civil War. And that doesn’t count the additional 200,000 or so deaths each year for which diabetes is listed as a “contributing” cause.

am 100% committed to following the Badass plan. ________ I will “show up” for myself for 21 days of this program and do exactly what the plan recommends. ________ I will get rid of tempting foods in my house, and I will replace them with nutritious ones. ________ I will prioritize my health and fitness from this day forward. ________ I will make body-honoring choices, day by day. ________ I agree that the plan is a lifestyle that I’m developing, not something I pick up and put down when I need it. ________ I understand that to take care of my body is to nurture the most valuable physical resource I have.

We cannot fluctuate between periods of full confidence of what was achieved on the cross and uncertainty as to what it means for us. We must be persuaded beyond turning that God is FOR us and not against us. Without this, we will have very shallow roots that can easily be pulled up by even the most benign storms of life. It is impossible to stand when you have divided your mind. When you have one part agreeing with God and the other part in agreement with the works of your hand or the world; you will become unstable in all of your ways. We must make our minds single regarding the word of God. Not only that it’s true, but that it is the only truth. Then we are ready to get fitted for the battles that are sure to come.

When it comes to financial incentives, size matters. There are things that people will do for a lot of money that they’d never do for just a few dollars. The most devoted carnivore in the world might well go vegan if the tofu lobby offered him a $10 million stipend. And then there’s the tale of an economist on holiday in Las Vegas. He found himself one night in a bar standing beside a gorgeous woman. “Would you be willing to sleep with me for $1 million?” he asked her. She looked him over. There wasn’t much to see—but still, $1 million! She agreed to go back to his room. “All right then, ” he said. “Would you be willing to sleep with me for $100?” “A hundred dollars!” she shot back. “What do you think I am, a prostitute?” “We’ve already established that. Now we’re just negotiating the price.

Now she volunteered to open an account in her name at Yandex Money, the largest online payment service in Russia, in order to collect donations to support the protests. The organizing committee agreed. With Romanova in charge, it meant that nobody would question where the money went, given her unblemished reputation for integrity. The money would be safe from government pressure too; any attempt to intimidate Romanova would clearly be futile. The account at Yandex Money became known as Romanova’s Purse.11 On December 20 Yandex published on Facebook a new application that facilitated crowdfunding through Facebook for Yandex Money. Previously Yandex Money had become a common way for Moscow’s middle class to carry out e-commerce online; people trusted Yandex with their credit cards and used it to make purchases. Now the crowdsourcing application took it to a new level. Protesters were quickly able to utilize a transparent way to collect money for the demonstrations, and it was all done thanks to Internet technology. Romanova was a fearless overseer. Yandex said it was pure coincidence that the new crowdsourcing app was rolled out at the same time that protesters were raising money for the next rally. The next big protest rally was scheduled for December 24 on Prospect Sakharova. Ilya Klishin renamed the main protest event page on Facebook, with the cover photo depicting a wide image of the Bolotnaya crowd and the slogan, “We Were on Bolotnaya and We Are Coming Back,” and on the side carried a picture with the words, “We Are for Fair Elections.” Organizers announced they needed 3 million rubles, about $100,000. Romanova soon collected more than 4 million rubles online and immediately posted a detailed report of how the money would be spent.

ac·cept   v. [trans.] 1 consent to receive (a thing offered): he accepted a pen as a present.    agree to undertake (an offered position or responsibility).  give an affirmative answer to (an offer or proposal); say yes to: he would accept their offer and see what happened | [intrans.] Tim offered Brian a lift home and he accepted.  DATED say yes to a proposal of marriage from (a man): Ronald is a good match and she ought to accept him.  receive as adequate, valid, or suitable: the college accepted her as a student;credit cards are widely accepted.  regard favorably or with approval; welcome: the Harvard literati never accepted him as one of them.  agree to meet (a draft or bill of exchange) by signing it.  (of a thing) be designed to allow (something) to be inserted or applied: vending machines that accepted 100-yen coins for cans of beer.

100% of half the people I talked to agreed with me a quarter of the time.

Instead, the thing that had captured my attention was this big metal column topped by…absolutely nothing. It was doing this in the parking lot of what I had to figure was the main supplier of off-campus food: a retro-fifties fast-food joint. Maybe it’s supposed to be some kind of art, I thought as I stared at the column. I was living in the big city now, after all. Public art happened. Not only that, it didn’t have to make sense. In fact, having it not make sense was probably a requirement. “They took it down for repairs,” a voice beside my suddenly said. I’m kind of embarrassed to admit this, but the truth is, I jumped about a mile. I’d been so mesmerized by the sight of that column extending upward into space, supporting empty air, that I’d totally lost track of all my soon-to-be-fellow students rushing by me. To this day, I can’t quite explain the fascination. But I’ve promised to tell you the 100 percent truth, which means I’ve got to include even the parts which make me appear less than impressive. “Huh?” Yes, all right, I know. Nowhere even near the list of incredibly clever replies. “They took it down for repairs,” the voice said again. “Took it down,” I echoed. By this time, I knew I was well on my way to breaking my own blending-in rule, big time. Sounding like a total idiot can generally be considered a foolproof method of getting yourself noticed. “The car that’s usually up there.” The guy--it was a guy; I’d calmed down enough to realize that--said. I snuck a quick glance at him out of the corner of my eye. First fleeting impression: tall and blond. The kind of muscular-yet-lanky build I’ve always been a sucker for. Faded jeans. Letterman jacket with just about every sport there was represented on it. Gotcha! I thought. BMOC. Big Man on Campus. This made me feel a little better for a couple of reasons. The first was that it showed my skills hadn’t abandoned me completely after all. I could still identify the players pretty much on sight. The second was that in my vast, though admittedly from-a-distance, experience of them, BMOCs have short attention spans for anyone less BOC than they are. Disconcerting and intense as it was at the moment, I could nevertheless take comfort in the fact that this guy’s unexpected and unnatural interest in me was also unlikely to last very long. “An old Chevy, I think,” he was going on now. “It’s supposed to be back soon, though. Not really the same without it, is it?” He actually sounded genuinely mournful. I was surprised to find myself battling back a quick, involuntary smile. He did seem to be more interesting than your average, run-of-the-mill BMOC. I had to give him that. Get a grip, O’Connor, I chastised myself. “Absolutely not,” I said, giving my head a semi-vigorous nod. That ought to move him along, I thought. You may not be aware of this fact, but agreeing with people is often an excellent way of getting them to forget all about you. After basking in the glow of agreement, most people are then perfectly content to go about their business, remembering only the fact that someone agreed and allowing the identity of the person who did the actual agreeing to fade into the background. This technique almost always works. In fact, I’d never known it not to. There was a moment of silence. A silence in which I could feel the BMOC’s eyes upon me. I kept my own eyes fixed on the top of the carless column. But the longer the silence went on, the more strained it became. At least it did on my side. This guy was simply not abiding by the rules. He was supposed to have basked and moved on by now.

with Ms. Caulfield proclaiming: “We all agree that Ayds is the most wholesome and natural way to a good figure.

According to at least one study, that would be the wrong decision. Researchers followed a sample of young adults who had a 50 percent chance of getting Huntington’s disease and who agreed to take the genetic test. The participants completed measures of depression and psychological well-being before they knew the results of the genetic test, right after they got the results, six months later, and one year later. Those who got the bad news were, of course, initially devastated, reporting considerably more distress and depression than did those who got the good news. At the six-month and one-year points, however, the two groups were indistinguishable—those who knew that they would die at a relatively young age were no more depressed, and expressed just as much well-being, as did those who knew that they were disease-free. The participants who learned they had the gene received the worst news one can get, and yet within six months they were as happy as anyone else. Even more striking were the results of a third group—those for whom the test was inconclusive or who had chosen not to take the test. At the beginning of the study, before any genetic testing had begun, this group was as happy and well-adjusted as the others. But as time went by, this group did the worst: at the one-year mark, they exhibited significantly more depression, and lower well-being, than those in the other two groups—including the ones who had found out that they had inherited the Huntington gene. In other words, people who were 100 percent sure that they would get the disease and die prematurely were happier and less depressed than people who were 50 percent sure that they were healthy and disease-free.

So, what qualities must you have to be a good delegator? There are five main tips: 1 Choose the right staff. 2 Train them. 3 Take care in briefing them, and ensuring their understanding of the `why' and `how to' oftasks delegated to them (and in imparting to them an understanding ofbusiness aims and policies). 4 Try not to interfere - stand back and support. 5 Control in a sensible and sensitive manner by checking progress at agreed intervals.

Now consider San Francisco, where the totals are dramatically higher. A study two years ago found that 60,750 placards have been issued to San Francisco residents. And if you include the nine-county Bay Area, that number is 453,830 — a 100 percent increase since 2001. A 2008 survey in San Francisco found that 45 percent of the parking spaces were occupied by cars with disabled placards. Nearly everyone agrees that placard abuse is widespread. We’ve all heard the stories of the guy who pulls into a disabled parking spot, hangs up his placard and then sprints across the parking lot to catch his BART train. The usual response is to call for a crackdown on placard abusers. But that doesn’t work. First, the drivers may not always have obvious disabilities. Second, law enforcement officers shouldn’t be deciding who should or should not qualify. The

The Daring Bicyclist Jim was always trying different things.  On this particular day he decided he wanted to see how fast a person could ride a bicycle before it became too hard to ride. So he asked a friend if he could tie his bike to the bumper of his car as he drove faster and faster.  His friend agreed. Before they got going they agreed on a way to communicate.  Jim would ring the bell on his bicycle once if he wanted to go faster, twice if the speed was good and repeatedly if he wanted to go slower. So the two adventurers took off and things were going pretty well.  The driver got up to over 50 miles per hour and Jim was able to handle that speed, following along on his bike. All of a sudden a shiny red sports car came up from behind.  The driver pulled alongside and revved up his engine as if he wanted to race.  Jim’s friend accepted the challenge and started to speed up.  He went faster and faster and soon forgot all about poor Jim tied to his bumper. A little way down the road, as the cars raced side by side, a policeman with a radar gun sat and watched as they sped past.  The policeman clocked them at 99 miles per hour. Before the policeman started to pursue the speeding cars, he reported in to headquarters on his radio.  “You are not going to believe this,” the policeman said.  “I am about to go after two cars racing down the road doing almost 100 miles per hour and there is this guy on a bicycle riding behind them waving his arms and ringing a bell trying to pass them!

If we agree that good food is more important than many so-called ‘important things in life,’ and surely no one would dismiss lightly an event which occurs at least twice a day, and which is conducive to happiness or bad temper,” he wrote in his book What Shall We Have Today?, “then we must admit that a cook is an important person in the household, since she dispenses gifts either precious or intolerable.

chant: “We need a _____ floppy; We need a _____ floppy!” Jobs agreed only to include a floppy drive on a later model. Still, the Japanese company Canon was impressed enough to invest $100 million in 1989 for a 16.7 percent piece of the company, giving NeXT important cash while it tried to roll out its computers. By then, however, much had changed in the

Tre. I agreed 100% with Skeet about it not being good for the kids to be seeing different bitches running in and out of his house.

Anslinger was the U.S. government’s “expert witness” advocating the Tax Act. In his testimonies between the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Subcommittee, as well as to Congress, Anslinger produced the following as “factual statements”: “Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind.” “Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death.” “I believe in some cases one cigarette might develop a homicidal mania, probably to kill his brother.” “…but all the experts agree that the continued use leads to insanity. There are many cases of insanity.” “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.

Bannon and the Breitbart editors had the same reaction and immediately turned on Megyn Kelly, with a fusillade of negative articles. She became the newest Breitbart narrative: the back-stabbing, self-promoting betrayer-of-the-cause. And Breitbart became the locus of pro-Trump, anti-Fox conservative anger. Between Thursday night, when the debate took place, and Sunday evening, Breitbart published twenty-five stories on Kelly, and the site’s editor in chief, Alex Marlow, went on CNN to accuse Fox News of “trying to take out Donald Trump” and staging “a gotcha debate.” The intensity of Republican anger stunned Fox News executives. The debate had drawn a record 24 million viewers. Now many of them were apoplectic at the network’s top talent. “In the beginning, virtually 100 percent of the emails were against Megyn Kelly,” a Fox source told New York’s Gabriel Sherman. “Roger was not happy. Most of the Fox viewers were taking Trump’s side.” Word spread through the building that Kelly was furious and had personally complained to Ailes. By Sunday, the attacks against her showed no sign of letting up, as other conservative opinion makers, such as radio host Mark Levin, agreed that her questions to Trump had been “unfair.” In a panic, Ailes called Bannon and begged him to call off the attacks. “Steve, this isn’t fair, and it’s killing us,” Ailes said. “You have to stop it.” “Fuck that, that was outrageous what she did!” Bannon retorted. “She pulled every trick out of the leftist playbook.” “You’ve gotta knock this crap off, Steve.” “Not until she backs off Trump—she’s still going after him on her show.” “She’s the star of this network! Cut it out!” The call ended without resolution. Bannon and Ailes would not speak again for almost a year.

When I turn to pull her to me, she rushes to me, and her hands immediately go for my jeans. She’s in a hurry. When I glance down, her fingers are shaking, and she won’t look up at me. She’s nervous. We can’t have that. “Sweetheart.” I catch her chin with my finger and tip her face up to look at me. “Sarah, this isn’t a race.” “Seriously, get naked, and we can get to it.” Get to it? Under normal circumstances, I would agree with her 100%. I enjoy foreplay as much as the next person, but the main event is, well, the main event. But I don’t want to rush this with her. I want to explore her, listen to her, smell her. Savor her. I grip her hands in mine and raise them to my lips, pressing a kiss to her fingers. “We’re going to get to it, trust me, but we’re going to get there slowly.” She blinks at me, as if she doesn’t understand the words coming out of my mouth. “Breathe, baby,” I whisper and kiss her forehead, her nose, her lips. I ease my body against hers and revel in the heat coming off her. She takes a deep breath, and with her eyes on mine, lifts up on her toes so she can meet my lips with hers, kissing me more lazily now, settling in to enjoy. And that’s exactly what I want her to do. Enjoy every touch, every kiss.

Dr. Warren agreed, and a demonstration was scheduled at the hospital. There, on October 16, 1846, before a considerable audience of doctors and medical students, Morton administered ether to a surgical patient, Gilbert Abbott; Dr. Warren then removed a tumor from Abbott's neck. The anesthetic proved completely effective, and the demonstration was an overwhelming success. That demonstration, which was promptly reported in many newspapers, was directly responsible for the widespread use of anesthetics in surgical operations over the course of the next few years.

In Original Medicare, according to an example provided by Kaiser, a $100 doctor’s bill involving a participating provider would cost you a 20 percent copayment, or $20, after Medicare’s 80 percent payment under Part B insurance rules. If you were, instead, seeing a nonparticipating provider, Medicare would first reduce its allowable fee for the service by 5 percent, from $100 to $95. If your doctor agreed to assignment here, Medicare would cover $76 of the $95 bill (its 80 percent payment) and you would pay the remaining $19. But if the doctor did not accept assignment, he or she would be able to charge you up to 115 percent of the reduced charge. In our example, this would total up to $109.25 (115 percent of $95). Medicare would still pay $76. But now you would pay not $19 but as much as $33.25. In the real world, of course, especially if the doctor involved was performing surgery, you would be multiplying this $100 many, many times over. And balance billing could definitely unbalance your budget.

love vashikaran specialist baba-773+91-7737788834 world Famous aghori baba ji known for his black magic skills and aghori powers Aghori Devraj shastri is experienced and famous for his powerfull skill Astrology offers the optimal remedy for resolving Breakup Problems. +91-7737788834 Those aiming to enhance their relationship should consider utilizing astrology to infuse happiness into their love livesLove Marriage Problem, Love Lost, Job Problem And All Astrology Problem Solution Here.You Have The Chance To Get Back Your Love Before It Is To Late. +91-7737788834 You Can Attract Your Lover. An Urge To Call You, To Meet You At The EarliestIf Parents Not Agree Or Someone Else Is Obstructing. Everything Will Be Done Help You Achieve Success.To Discuss Your Problem With The Astrologer Or mail Your Details. Guranteed Result Within 07 Hour. +91-7737788834 Are You Having Problems In Your Life Get Solution Through Systematic Remedies Of All Problems With In 07 Hours And With 100% GUARANTEE. Problems Are Like . 1. Like Jadu — Tona. +91-7737788834 2. Business Related Problems. +91-7737788834 3.. Husband And Wife Relationship. +91-7737788834 4.. Be Free From Enemy / 2nd Wife . +91-7737788834 5.. Settle In Foreign. +91-7737788834 6.. Desired Love. +91-7737788834 7.. Disputes Between Husband / Wife. +91-7737788834 8.. Problems In Study. +91-7737788834 9.. Childless Women. +91-7737788834 10.. Intoxication. +91-7737788834 11.. Physical Problems. +91-7737788834 12.. Domestic Controversy. +91-7737788834 13.. Problems In Family Relations. +91-7737788834 14.. Promotions Or Willful Marriage. +91-7737788834 15.. Love Marriage Problem Solution Marriage. +91-7737788834 16. Child Problem Solution. +91-7737788834 1. Get Your Ex Love BAack+91-7737788834 2. B”lack M”agic Specilaist+91-7737788834 3. Educ ation Problem+91-7737788834 4. Visa And Aborad+91-7737788834 5. Love Marriage Problem+91-7737788834 6. Lottrey Number 7. Property Problem Solutiuon 8. Divorce Problem Solution 9. Husband Wife DisturbanceE Solution 10. Family Problem Solution 7788834

love spel vashikaran baba -7737788834+91-7737788834 world Famous aghori baba ji known for his black magic skills and aghori powers Aghori Devraj shastri is experienced and famous for his powerfull skill Astrology offers the optimal remedy for resolving Breakup Problems. +91-7737788834 Those aiming to enhance their relationship should consider utilizing astrology to infuse happiness into their love livesLove Marriage Problem, Love Lost, Job Problem And All Astrology Problem Solution Here.You Have The Chance To Get Back Your Love Before It Is To Late. +91-7737788834 You Can Attract Your Lover. An Urge To Call You, To Meet You At The EarliestIf Parents Not Agree Or Someone Else Is Obstructing. Everything Will Be Done Help You Achieve Success.To Discuss Your Problem With The Astrologer Or mail Your Details. Guranteed Result Within 07 Hour. +91-7737788834 Are You Having Problems In Your Life Get Solution Through Systematic Remedies Of All Problems With In 07 Hours And With 100% GUARANTEE. Problems Are Like . 1. Like Jadu — Tona. +91-7737788834 2. Business Related Problems. +91-7737788834 3.. Husband And Wife Relationship. +91-7737788834 4.. Be Free From Enemy / 2nd Wife . +91-7737788834 5.. Settle In Foreign. +91-7737788834 6.. Desired Love. +91-7737788834 7.. Disputes Between Husband / Wife. +91-7737788834 8.. Problems In Study. +91-7737788834 9.. Childless Women. +91-7737788834 10.. Intoxication. +91-7737788834 11.. Physical Problems. +91-7737788834 12.. Domestic Controversy. +91-7737788834 13.. Problems In Family Relations. +91-7737788834 14.. Promotions Or Willful Marriage. +91-7737788834 15.. Love Marriage Problem Solution Marriage. +91-7737788834 16. Child Problem Solution. +91-7737788834 1. Get Your Ex Love BAack+91-7737788834 2. B”lack M”agic Specilaist+91-7737788834 3. Educ ation Problem+91-7737788834 4. Visa And Aborad+91-7737788834 5. Love Marriage Problem+91-7737788834 6. Lottrey Number 7. Property Problem Solutiuon 8. Divorce Problem Solution 9. Husband Wife DisturbanceE Solution 10. Family Problem Solution

love marriage probelm solav =7737788834+91-7737788834 world Famous aghori baba ji known for his black magic skills and aghori powers Aghori Devraj shastri is experienced and famous for his powerfull skill Astrology offers the optimal remedy for resolving Breakup Problems. +91-7737788834 Those aiming to enhance their relationship should consider utilizing astrology to infuse happiness into their love livesLove Marriage Problem, Love Lost, Job Problem And All Astrology Problem Solution Here.You Have The Chance To Get Back Your Love Before It Is To Late. +91-7737788834 You Can Attract Your Lover. An Urge To Call You, To Meet You At The EarliestIf Parents Not Agree Or Someone Else Is Obstructing. Everything Will Be Done Help You Achieve Success.To Discuss Your Problem With The Astrologer Or mail Your Details. Guranteed Result Within 07 Hour. +91-7737788834 Are You Having Problems In Your Life Get Solution Through Systematic Remedies Of All Problems With In 07 Hours And With 100% GUARANTEE. Problems Are Like . 1. Like Jadu — Tona. +91-7737788834 2. Business Related Problems. +91-7737788834 3.. Husband And Wife Relationship. +91-7737788834 4.. Be Free From Enemy / 2nd Wife . +91-7737788834 5.. Settle In Foreign. +91-7737788834 6.. Desired Love. +91-7737788834 7.. Disputes Between Husband / Wife. +91-7737788834 8.. Problems In Study. +91-7737788834 9.. Childless Women. +91-7737788834 10.. Intoxication. +91-7737788834 11.. Physical Problems. +91-7737788834 12.. Domestic Controversy. +91-7737788834 13.. Problems In Family Relations. +91-7737788834 14.. Promotions Or Willful Marriage. +91-7737788834 15.. Love Marriage Problem Solution Marriage. +91-7737788834 16. Child Problem Solution. +91-7737788834 1. Get Your Ex Love BAack+91-7737788834 2. B”lack M”agic Specilaist+91-7737788834 3. Educ ation Problem+91-7737788834 4. Visa And Aborad+91-7737788834 5. Love Marriage Problem+91-7737788834 6. Lottrey Number 7. Property Problem Solutiuon 8. Divorce Problem Solution 9. Husband Wife DisturbanceE Solution 10. Family Problem Solution

+91-7737788834 world Famous aghori baba ji known for his black magic skills and aghori powers Aghori Devraj shastri is experienced and famous for his powerfull skill Astrology offers the optimal remedy for resolving Breakup Problems. +91-7737788834 Those aiming to enhance their relationship should consider utilizing astrology to infuse happiness into their love livesLove Marriage Problem, Love Lost, Job Problem And All Astrology Problem Solution Here.You Have The Chance To Get Back Your Love Before It Is To Late. +91-7737788834 You Can Attract Your Lover. An Urge To Call You, To Meet You At The EarliestIf Parents Not Agree Or Someone Else Is Obstructing. Everything Will Be Done Help You Achieve Success.To Discuss Your Problem With The Astrologer Or mail Your Details. Guranteed Result Within 07 Hour. +91-7737788834 Are You Having Problems In Your Life Get Solution Through Systematic Remedies Of All Problems With In 07 Hours And With 100% GUARANTEE. Problems Are Like . 1. Like Jadu — Tona. +91-7737788834 2. Business Related Problems. +91-7737788834 3.. Husband And Wife Relationship. +91-7737788834 4.. Be Free From Enemy / 2nd Wife . +91-7737788834 5.. Settle In Foreign. +91-7737788834 6.. Desired Love. +91-7737788834 7.. Disputes Between Husband / Wife. +91-7737788834 8.. Problems In Study. +91-7737788834 9.. Childless Women. +91-7737788834 10.. Intoxication. +91-7737788834 11.. Physical Problems. +91-7737788834 12.. Domestic Controversy. +91-7737788834 13.. Problems In Family Relations. +91-7737788834 14.. Promotions Or Willful Marriage. +91-7737788834 15.. Love Marriage Problem Solution Marriage. +91-7737788834 16. Child Problem Solution. +91-7737788834 1. Get Your Ex Love BAack+91-7737788834 2. B”lack M”agic Specilaist+91-7737788834 3. Educ ation Problem+91-7737788834 4. Visa And Aborad+91-7737788834 5. Love Marriage Problem+91-7737788834 6. Lottrey Number 7. Property Problem Solutiuon 8. Divorce Problem Solution 9. Husband Wife DisturbanceE Solution 10. Family Problem Solution

love ashikiaran specialist baba +91-7737788834 +91-7737788834 world Famous aghori baba ji known for his black magic skills and aghori powers Aghori Devraj shastri is experienced and famous for his powerfull skill Astrology offers the optimal remedy for resolving Breakup Problems. +91-7737788834 Those aiming to enhance their relationship should consider utilizing astrology to infuse happiness into their love livesLove Marriage Problem, Love Lost, Job Problem And All Astrology Problem Solution Here.You Have The Chance To Get Back Your Love Before It Is To Late. +91-7737788834 You Can Attract Your Lover. An Urge To Call You, To Meet You At The EarliestIf Parents Not Agree Or Someone Else Is Obstructing. Everything Will Be Done Help You Achieve Success.To Discuss Your Problem With The Astrologer Or mail Your Details. Guranteed Result Within 07 Hour. +91-7737788834 Are You Having Problems In Your Life Get Solution Through Systematic Remedies Of All Problems With In 07 Hours And With 100% GUARANTEE. Problems Are Like . 1. Like Jadu — Tona. +91-7737788834 2. Business Related Problems. +91-7737788834 3.. Husband And Wife Relationship. +91-7737788834 4.. Be Free From Enemy / 2nd Wife . +91-7737788834 5.. Settle In Foreign. +91-7737788834 6.. Desired Love. +91-7737788834 7.. Disputes Between Husband / Wife. +91-7737788834 8.. Problems In Study. +91-7737788834 9.. Childless Women. +91-7737788834 10.. Intoxication. +91-7737788834 11.. Physical Problems. +91-7737788834 12.. Domestic Controversy. +91-7737788834 13.. Problems In Family Relations. +91-7737788834 14.. Promotions Or Willful Marriage. +91-7737788834 15.. Love Marriage Problem Solution Marriage. +91-7737788834 16. Child Problem Solution. +91-7737788834 1. Get Your Ex Love BAack+91-7737788834 2. B”lack M”agic Specilaist+91-7737788834 3. Educ ation Problem+91-7737788834 4. Visa And Aborad+91-7737788834 5. Love Marriage Problem+91-7737788834 6. Lottrey Number 7. Property Problem Solutiuon 8. Divorce Problem Solution 9. Husband Wife DisturbanceE Solution 10. Family Problem Solution

+91-7737788834 world Famous aghori baba ji known for his black magic skills and aghori powers Aghori Devraj shastri is experienced and famous for his powerfull skill Astrology offers the optimal remedy for resolving Breakup Problems. +91-7737788834 Those aiming to enhance their relationship should consider utilizing astrology to infuse happiness into their love livesLove Marriage Problem, Love Lost, Job Problem And All Astrology Problem Solution Here.You Have The Chance To Get Back Your Love Before It Is To Late. +91-7737788834 You Can Attract Your Lover. An Urge To Call You, To Meet You At The EarliestIf Parents Not Agree Or Someone Else Is Obstructing. Everything Will Be Done Help You Achieve Success.To Discuss Your Problem With The Astrologer Or mail Your Details. Guranteed Result Within 07 Hour. +91-7737788834 Are You Having Problems In Your Life Get Solution Through Systematic Remedies Of All Problems With In 07 Hours And With 100% GUARANTEE. Problems Are Like . 1. Like Jadu — Tona. +91-7737788834 2. Business Related Problems. +91-7737788834 3.. Husband And Wife Relationship. +91-7737788834 4.. Be Free From Enemy / 2nd Wife . +91-7737788834 5.. Settle In Foreign. +91-7737788834 6.. Desired Love. +91-7737788834 7.. Disputes Between Husband / Wife. +91-7737788834 8.. Problems In Study. +91-7737788834 9.. Childless Women. +91-7737788834 10.. Intoxication. +91-7737788834 11.. Physical Problems. +91-7737788834 12.. Domestic Controversy. +91-7737788834 13.. Problems In Family Relations. +91-7737788834 14.. Promotions Or Willful Marriage. +91-7737788834 15.. Love Marriage Problem Solution Marriage. +91-7737788834 16. Child Problem Solution. +91-7737788834 1. Get Your Ex Love BAack+91-7737788834 2. B”lack M”agic Specilaist+91-7737788834 3. Educ ation Problem+91-7737788834 4. Visa And Aborad+91-7737788834 5. Love Marriage Problem+91-7737788834 6. Lottrey Number 7. Property Problem Solutiuon 8. Divorce Problem Solution 9. Husband Wife DisturbanceE Solution 10. Family Problem Solution

+91-7737788834 world Famous aghori baba ji known for his black magic skills and aghori powers Aghori Devraj shastri is experienced and famous for his powerfull skill Astrology offers the optimal remedy for resolving Breakup Problems. +91-7737788834 Those aiming to enhance their relationship should consider utilizing astrology to infuse happiness into their love livesLove Marriage Problem, Love Lost, Job Problem And All Astrology Problem Solution Here.You Have The Chance To Get Back Your Love Before It Is To Late. +91-7737788834 You Can Attract Your Lover. An Urge To Call You, To Meet You At The EarliestIf Parents Not Agree Or Someone Else Is Obstructing. Everything Will Be Done Help You Achieve Success.To Discuss Your Problem With The Astrologer Or mail Your Details. Guranteed Result Within 07 Hour. +91-7737788834 Are You Having Problems In Your Life Get Solution Through Systematic Remedies Of All Problems With In 07 Hours And With 100% GUARANTEE. Problems Are Like . 1. Like Jadu — Tona. +91-7737788834 2. Business Related Problems. +91-7737788834 3.. Husband And Wife Relationship. +91-7737788834 4.. Be Free From Enemy / 2nd Wife . +91-7737788834 5.. Settle In Foreign. +91-7737788834 6.. Desired Love. +91-7737788834 7.. Disputes Between Husband / Wife. +91-7737788834 8.. Problems In Study. +91-7737788834 9.. Childless Women. +91-7737788834 10.. Intoxication. +91-7737788834 11.. Physical Problems. +91-7737788834 12.. Domestic Controversy. +91-7737788834 13.. Problems In Family Relations. +91-7737788834 14.. Promotions Or Willful Marriage. +91-7737788834 15.. Love Marriage Problem Solution Marriage. +91-7737788834 16. Child Problem Solution. +91-7737788834 1. Get Your Ex Love BAack+91-7737788834 2. B”lack M”agic Specilaist+91-7737788834 3. Educ ation Problem+91-7737788834 4. Visa And Aborad+91-7737788834 5. Love Marriage Problem+91-7737788834 6. Lottrey Number 7. Property Problem Solutiuon 8. Divorce Problem Solution 9. Husband Wife DisturbanceE Solution 10. Family Problem Solution

+91-7357080525world Famous aghori baba ji known for his black magic skills and aghori powers Aghori Devraj shastri is experienced and famous for his powerfull skill Astrology offers the optimal remedy for resolving Breakup Problems+91-7357080525- Those aiming to enhance their relationship should consider utilizing astrology to infuse happiness into their love livesLove Marriage Problem, Love Lost, Job Problem+91-7357080525 And All Astrology Problem Solution Here.You Have The Chance To Get Back Your Love Before It Is To Late. +91- You Can Attract Your Lover. An Urge To Call You, To Meet You At The EarliestIf Parents Not Agree Or Someone Else Is Obstructing. Everything Will Be Done Help You Achieve Success.To Discuss Your Problem With The Astrologer Or mail Your Details. +91-7357080525Guranteed Result Within 07 Hour. +91- Are You Having Problems In Your Life Get Solution Through Systematic Remedies Of All Problems With In 07 Hours And With 100% GUARANTEE. Problems Are Like . 1. Like Jadu — 3.. Husband And Wife Relationship. +91-7357080525 4.. Be Free From Enemy / 2nd Wife +91-73570805255.. Settle In Foreign. 6.. Desired Love. +91-73570805257.. Disputes Between Husband / Wife. +91- 8.. Problems In Study. +91-7357080525 9.. Childless Women+91-735708052** 10.. Intoxication+91-7357080525 11.. Physical Problems+91-7357080525 12.. Domestic Controversy. +91-7357080525 13.. Problems In Family Relations. +91-735708052514.. Promotions Or Willful Marriage+91-7357080525 15.. Love Marriage Problem Solution Marriage+91-735708052516. Child Problem Solution. +91-73570805251. Get Your Ex Love BAack+91-7357080525 2. B”lack M”agic Specilaist+91-73570805253. Educ ation Problem+91-73570805254. Visa And Aborad+91-73570805255. Love Marriage Problem+91-73570805256. Lottrey Number 7. Property Problem Solutiuon 8. Divorce Problem Solution 9. Husband Wife DisturbanceE Solution 10. Family Problem Solution

My father was born in 1941 and he taught me never to confuse pity with comprehension. His Quechan (Yuma) grandfather was born in a time when California’s Indian population had plummeted 90 percent because of foreign diseases, Catholic slave-labor, and the government’s hiring of private militia to bring in Indian scalps. California’s first governor, Peter Hardeman Burnett, openly promoted genocide, calling for “a war of extermination” in his 1851 second state address. With the help of the U.S. Army, the California legislature distributed weapons to vigilantes, who raided Native homes and killed 100,000 of my ancestors in the first two years of the gold rush alone. The legislature paid $1.1 million to these murderers, and when it was done, the U.S. Congress agreed to reimburse the state.

Many gnostics, then, would have agreed in principle with Ludwig Feuerbach, the nineteenth-century psychologist, that “theology is really anthropology” (the term derives, of course, from anthropos, and means “study of humanity”). For gnostics, exploring the psyche became explicitly what it is for many people today implicitly—a religious quest. Some who seek their own interior direction, like the radical gnostics, reject religious institutions as a hindrance to their progress. Others, like the Valentinians, willingly participate in them, although they regard the church more as an instrument of their own self-discovery than as the necessary “ark of salvation.

Zanzibar was the first Swahili town to come under serious Portuguese attack. In 1503, Ruy Lourenço Ravasco, a Portuguese sea captain, blasted at the townspeople with his ship’s cannon until the sultan of Zanzibar agreed to pay an annual tribute of 100 mithqals in gold (the equivalent of 425 grams). The attack was, in fact, little more than a piratical raid launched on the initiative of one Portuguese captain.

The great British playwright and poet, William Shakespeare, is generally acknowledged to be the greatest writer who ever lived. There is a good deal of dispute about his identity (which will be discussed below), but the talent and achievements of the author are agreed to by all.

You know, it’s okay to let people help you once in a while. It’s okay to let people care about you.” I can’t tell her that I agree. I can’t even give a weak nod to appease her. I learned a long time ago that help never comes without a price tag, hidden or not. And even the people who claim to care about you the most can turn against you in the blink of an eye. She walks away to fill the incoming drink orders from the dining room, and I get busy bringing fresh rounds to the people seated at the long bar.

Union Bank of Switzerland in 1999 by which the bank agreed to pay $1.25 billion into a fund administered by a U.S. District Court: $800 million for restitution of dormant bank accounts; $100 million for compensation for looted assets; and $325 million for payments to former slave laborers at Swiss-owned companies in occupied Europe or at German firms that had put their revenue in Swiss banks and for refugees mistreated by the Swiss.

100% Savage Men needs to understand and be more mindful of 100% Savage Women's emotions to show empathy&sympathy! Most of the 100% Savage Men needs to be more sensitive to 100% Savage Women's situations to be emotionally being there for them to empathize and sympathize women's emotions, feelings, thoughts&opinions! Empathy&Sympathy are so important to show towards 100% Savage Women especially from 100% Savage Men! So true&100% agreed! Preach! 100% Savage Women are so sensitive&so emotional for sure!

Letting go of judgment and accepting others just as they are is difficult. However, it’s one of the most powerful Thoughtfully Fit practices. Flexibility teaches us the value of acceptance—full and unconditional acceptance of others. Even, or maybe especially, when you don’t agree with their choices or behaviors. It’s much easier to accept others when we agree with them 100 percent.

Consensus does not equal unanimity! Too many managers have interpreted consensus to mean 100% unanimity. Not every person must agree with the decision for there to be consensus; there only needs to be general agreement. General agreement is significantly higher than a 51% majority, but usually falls short of 100% unanimity. It is something that is sensed, rather than quantified. Once a consensus is reached, those who disagreed during the process must agree or get off the ship.

Sadhguru – WARNING! | Misfortune Will Come Upon You | If You Visit This Temple in South India - Sadhguru Darshan - YouTube channel comment about this video message, Until now, I have many times trolled your videos, but now honestly asking two question about this very video, 1) Tanjore temple will bring misfortune because of incorrect consecration, that is not correct, it was consecrated in right way for the people with bad intention. 2) You can not build a structure without stable foundation - Not agreeing - Because earth itself moving and there is no stable foundation on earth, even Maglev trains are example of structure and dynamics without stable foundation. 3) If you are devotee or if you have sacrificed your soul for the greater good, it is going to benefit much and can be manifested in any manner as we wish, 1000& truth, but for such sacrifice the person needs to completely trust on particular aspect or at least on one particular person with 100% trust - that is the problem, for getting such trust, that persons intention is under question, ok I am sacrificing my soul to someone whether its boy or girl or spiritual people like you or institutions or some other hierarchy , now what is their intentions from me! Until I completely have analyzed their background with their motive and intentions and long term goals, I will not trust even 1%, you are talking about 100% trust

Difference & Discrimination (The Sonnet) There ain't no difference that can't be conquered, Except for those that are rooted in inhumanity. A bigot's emphasis on their supremacy over others, Is not a difference in opinion but clinical insanity. Nobody is inferior to nobody in this world of ours, Except for those who think of others as such. Neither ancestry nor luxury defines a character, Conduct alone defines character, above all fuss. Say, discrimination is not a difference in opinion, It's an act that sets animals apart from humans. Free speech is a phenomenon of human society, Hate speech is an act of stoneage barbarians. Let us distinguish differences from discrimination, Then celebrate differences while treating discrimination.

Hochschild describes the EIC official Léon Fiévez as a “sadist” who “terrorized” the rubber-rich Équateur district where he was commissioner. His source is the George Bricusse mentioned above. Bricusse lasted only three years in the Congo before dying of either typhoid or malaria, a common occurrence for the EIC where the annual mortality rate for European soldiers was 20 percent. In the 1894 incident recalled, Fiévez is recounting to Bricusse his desperate attempts to feed his soldiers while battling slave lords in the area. There is no mention of rubber because this particular place had little of it. The slaving business, on the other hand, is flourishing and Bricusse notes its devastation everywhere. Fiévez had arrived a few days earlier and held parlay with local chiefs. They had agreed to supply his soldiers with food for payment. They then reneged and fled into the forest. Fiévez sent his troops in pursuit and, in the ensuing fight, 100 of the chiefs’ soldiers were killed. After that, the chiefs made good on their promise.

Investor: “Great! Now, I know we talked about the fact that you want $110,000 for the house. I already mentioned that I’d be purchasing your house as an investment, and unfortunately, I just can’t afford to pay that much and still be able to make a profit on the deal. But, here’s what I can do. I can either pay you $90,000 in cash for the property or I can pay you $100,000 if you’re willing to owner finance the sale. That means we would complete the sale in ten days, but you would wait six months to collect your $100,000. Which of those options would you prefer?” At this point, if you’ve done a good job of selecting your offer prices (e.g., you weren’t too generous), there is a good chance the seller isn’t going to accept either of those offers without some additional negotiation. The good news is that we’ve gotten the seller to implicitly agree to all the other terms and contingencies in the contract. Not only that, but we’ve now given the seller two options for the sale price, and his response to your final question (“Which of those options would you prefer?”) will give insight into which direction the negotiation goes.

Bea: Did you meet a girl or something? Just curious. Bea: That brunette from your work was hot. Alexander smiles to himself, the ghost of Eden's touch and the smell of her hair lingering like a dream. Alexander: I 100% agree with you there. Bea: LOL Happy trails, tiger.